that the mere deposit of a cashier’s check would be sufficient; instead, the trial court must accept the payment and file the bond, staying the judgment. 5 See D.C. Code § 42-1207(d)(1); Haw. Rev. Stat. § 501-151; Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-269; Ashworth v. Hankins, 241 Ark. 629, 408 S.W.2d 871, 873 (1966); Top Rail Ranch Estates, LLC v. Walker, 2014 COA 9, 327 P.3d 321, 334-35, cert. denied, No. 14SC283 (Colo. Nov. 24, 2014); Vonmitschke-Collande v. Kramer, 841 So. 2d 481, 482 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002); Vance v. Lomas Mortg. USA, Inc., 263 Ga. 33, 426 S.E.2d 873, 875 (1993); McClung v. Hohl, 10 Kan. App. 93, 61 P. 507, 508 (1900); Weston Builders & Developers, Inc. v. McBerry, LLC, 167 Md. App. 24, 891 A.2d 430, 439-41 (2006); Oldewurtel v. Redding, 421 N.W.2d 2 S.E.2d 876, 880 (2012) (<HOLDING>). 6 The Langes argue that under Cashmere State
holding that a tax appeal on real property is a lien on the real estate and not a personal obligation of the landowner holding that the proponent of a lis pendens must show a fair nexus between the alleged fraudulent transfer and the real property encumbered by the lis pendens holding that appellants failed to state a claim regarding real property therefore the lis pendens was improperly granted and could be canceled notwithstanding appeal holding that forfeiture of real property may be adjudicated before the seizure occurs because real property cannot abscond holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in real property