Court Denies AT&T’s Request For $7 Million Bond To Secure Claims Against Party With History Of Refusing To Pay “Even A Radish’s Worth” of Judgments

On April 30, 2024, Justice Andrea Masley denied AT&T’s request for a $7 million bond to secure claims it had brought against a party with an acknowledged history of refusing to pay judgments and insisting on judgment enforcement procedures. In Grupo Salinas Telecom, S.A. DE C.V., et al., v. AT&T Mobility Holdings B.V., et al., Index No. 652411/2022, the Court noted that it has inherent authority to impose a bond “to ensure that litigation proceed[s] efficiently and that the parties adhere[] to their obligations of litigating in good faith.” The Court acknowledged Grupo Salina’s “history of refusing to pay judgments and making public statements espousing its pride for failing to pay its judgments,” including a statement by its chairman that he “won’t pay even a radish’s worth.” Nevertheless, it concluded that a bond was not warranted. The Court explained:

Here, we have Grupo refusing to pay the judgment in another case before this court with the same parties (650330/2020) and a history of refusing to pay judgments and making public statements espousing its pride for failing to pay its judgments. . . . Grupo insists on putting its adversaries through the judgment enforcement process. To be clear, this court does not condone Grupo’s failure to pay the judgment in the AT&T action (650330/2020). However, it is premature to secure Grupo’s payment of AT&T’s damages in this action where the parties have just completed document production.

The attorneys at Schlam Stone & Dolan frequently counsel clients concerning enforcement of judgments. Contact the Commercial Division Blog Committee at commercialdivisionblog@schlamstone.com if you or a client have questions concerning such issues.