Band: She would not have appeal rights, but writ relief is likely available to her (confirming this would require some research). But assuming writ relief is available, I doubt Simons would pursue it, as less than 10% of writs are granted, and they are very, very work intensive and costly.
Edited to add:
The law is clear cut. The rules of statutory construction do not support the construction argued by the WTBTS. The forms of security allowed by the statute are all, extremely liquid assets. No real or personal property is mentioned. The reasons are obvious. Values of real and personal property can fluctuate, and it is not necessarily easy to convert such property into liquid assets. If the winning party's rights to collect the judgment are going to be put on hold, it's only fair to ensure that they will be able to collect when the hold is released.
One more option would be a motion for reconsideration of the decision on this motion, but that would be ruled upon by the same judge (i.e., the trial judge deciding the present motion).
