The Court ruled that Defendants’ appeal, following an adverse judgment on liability, did not affect a substantial right even though the damages phase of the trial remained. The Court found that it had continued jurisdiction over the case and that it could proceed with the damages phase notwithstanding the pendency of the appeal. The Court also ruled that it would not stay the case during the pendency of the appeal.
The Court denied the Plaintiffs’ request for the appointment of a receiver, but held that it would impose conditions on the Defendants’ operation of their business. It held that:
The Court’s greater power to appoint a receiver for the Company logically includes the lesser power to require the parties who are in control of the Company’s assets to maintain those assets in an appropriate and businesslike manner, including hiring an independent accountant to maintain the books and records of the company pendente lite and directing [the Defendants] to cease making personal use of Company assets.