(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, in order to secure and protect the moneys to be received as a result of the master settlement agreement in civil litigation under any legal theory involving a signatory, a successor of a signatory, or any affiliate of a signatory to the master settlement agreement, the supersedeas bond to be furnished in order to stay the execution of the judgment during the entire course of appellate review shall be set in accordance with applicable laws or court rules, except that the total bond that is required of all appellants collectively shall not exceed one hundred million dollars, regardless of the value of the judgment.
(2) If an appellee proves by a preponderance of the evidence that an appellant is dissipating assets outside the ordinary course of business to avoid the payment of a judgment, a court may require the appellant to post a bond in an amount up to the amount of the judgment.
Findings—Intent—2006 c 246: "(1) The legislature finds that:
(a) Over the past five years, Washington has received more than seven hundred million dollars from the tobacco master settlement agreement;
(b) While the state has securitized a portion of the moneys it was promised under the master settlement agreement, the remainder of the master settlement agreement payments is used to fund important health programs such as the state's basic health plan, children's health insurance, childhood vaccines, and public health;
(c) Litigation now pending in the state or filed in the future could result in damage awards against master settlement agreement signatories or their successors or affiliates that are so large that the defendants could obtain a stay of the execution of the judgment while they appeal only by declaring bankruptcy, rather than posting an appeal bond under state law;
(d) Should a master settlement agreement signatory declare bankruptcy, issues might be raised about whether that disrupts or jeopardizes the payments that fund important state programs;
(e) The legislature has the substantive obligation to raise revenue and to protect the financial well-being of the state and its citizens. Pursuant to that obligation, it is the legislature's responsibility to ensure the continued receipt of master settlement agreement funds to the maximum extent possible.
(2) Therefore, the legislature intends to place a maximum limit on the appeal bond a master settlement agreement signatory or a successor or affiliate of a master settlement agreement signatory can be required to post in litigation in order to stay execution of the judgment without being forced into bankruptcy while it exercises its right to appeal an adverse judgment." [
2006 c 246 s 1.]