Decker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ i 

### No. 03

- 15

- 00393

- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARY DECKER, Relator

Origin al Proceeding from the County Court at Law #4, Williamson County, Texas; Cause No. 15

- 0508

- CC4

Styled “Clifford Homes, LLC.

v. Mary Decker and Christopher Decker and/or all other occupants of 1607 Main St. ”

Ho n. Mickey R. Pennington , Presiding Judge

RELATORS EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS and EMERGENCY MOTION FOR STAY OF WRIT

Matthew L. Wilson David Rogers Texas Bar No. 24079588 Texas Bar No. 24014089 L AW 

### O FFICE OF 

### M ATTHEW WILSON 

### , PLLC 

### L AW 

### O FFICE OF 

### D AVID 

### R OGERS 

### 1201 Spyglass Drive 1201 Spyg lass Drive Suite 100 Suite 100 Austin, TX 78746 Austin, TX 78746 MWilson@ matthewwilsonlaw.com Firm@DARogersLaw.com Telephone: 512

- 201

- 4519 Telephone: 512

- 923

- 1836 Fax: 512

- 777

- 5988 Fax: 512

- 777

- 5988

ATTORNEY S FOR RELATOR
, MARY DECKER

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT REQUESTED ACCEPTED 03-15-00393-CV 5923451 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS 7/2/2015 2:53:07 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERKDecker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ ii 

### IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL

The following is a complete list of all parties, as well as the names and addresses of all counsel:

PARTIES COUNSEL

Mary Decker Matthew L. Wilson Texas Bar No. 24079588 W ILSON 

### L AW 

### O FFICE 

### , PLLC 1201 Spyglass Drive Suite 100 Austin, TX 78746 Telephone: 903

- 705

- 2540 Fax: 512

- 201

- 4082

David Rogers Texas Bar No. 24014089 L AW 

### O FFICE OF 

### D AVID 

### R OGERS 

### 1201 Spyglass Drive Suite 100 Austin, TX 78746 Telephone: 512

- 923

- 1836 Fax: 512

- 201

- 4082

Clifford Homes, LLC

. J. Hyde Texas Bar No. 2402708 3 The J. Hyde Law Office, PLLC 111 E. 17th St. #12015 Austin, TX 78711 Telephone: 512

- 200

- 4080 Fax: 512

- 582

- 8295Decker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ iii 

### TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Identity of Parties and Counsel

................................ ................................ ................. i i

Table of Contents

................................ ................................ ................................ .... iii

Index of Authorities

................................ ................................ ................................ . i v

A ppendices

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... v

Statement of the Case

................................ ................................ ............................... 1

Facts

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 2

Argument & Authorities

................................ ................................ .......................... 4

Rule 510.8(d)(3) prohibits issuing writ

................................ ................................ ..... 4

The Logic of Consistency

................................ ................................ ......................... 5

Sauce for the Gander

................................ ................................ ................................ 7

Prayer

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 8

Certificate of Service

................................ ................................ .............................. 10

Certificate of Conference

................................ ................................ ........................ 10Decker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ iv 

### INDEX OF AUTHORI TIES

CASES

CSR Ltd. v. Link , 925 S.W.2d 591, 596 (Tex. 1996)

................................ ............... 7 In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. , 148 S .W.3d 124, 135

- 36 (Tex. 2004)

................. 6 Isern v. Ninth Court of Appeals, 925 S.W.2d 6 04, 606 (Tex. 1996)

.......................... 7 Knepp v. K.R.A.K. Invs., LLC, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 3699, 2014 WL 1464978 (Tex. App. Austin Apr. 8, 2014)

................................ ................................ 8 Marshall v. Hous. Auth., 198 S.W.3d 782, 2006 Tex. LEXIS 193, 49 Tex. Sup. J. 399 (Tex. 2006)

................................ ................................ ............................ 6 Peck v. Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp ., 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 15154, 2013 WL 6805665 (Tex. App. Austin Dec. 18, 2013)

................................ ..................... 6 Perales v. Riviera, 13

- 03

- 002

- CV, 2003 WL 21705740 (Tex. App. July 24, 2003) citing El Paso Dev. Co. v. Berryman, 729 S.W.2d 883, 888 (Tex.App.

- Corpus Christi 1987, no writ)

................................ ................................ . 4 Republican Party of Texas v. Dietz , 940 S.W.2d 86, 88 (Tex. 1997)

.... ................. .. 7 Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 839

– 844 (Tex. 1992)

................................ ....... 7 Wilhelm v. Federal Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n , 349 S.W.3d 766, 768 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.)

................................ ................................ .... 5, 6

RUL ES

Tex. R. App. P. §24.400(a)........................1

CODES T EX



### . P ROP



### . C ODE 

### §24.007(a)..................3, 5, 7 TEX. GOV’T CODE § 22.220, 22.221 .......4Decker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ v 

### APPENDICES

ITEM A Judgment of the Justice Court

ITEM B Judgment of the County Court

ITEM C Notice of Appeal and Motion for Bond A pplication

ITEM D Email from Relator’s counsel to county court clerk

ITEM E Response email from county court clerk to counsel1 

### No. 03

- 15

- 00393

- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARY DECKER, Relator

Origin al Proceeding from the County Court at Law #4, Williamson County, Texas; Cause No. 15

- 0508

- CC4

Styled “Clifford Homes, LLC.

v. Mary Decker and Christopher Decker and/or all other occupants of 1607 Main St.”

Ho n. Mickey R. Pennington , Presiding Judge

RELATOR ’ S PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS and EMERGENCY MOTION FOR STAY OF WRIT

Relator
, MARY DECKER submit s this Petition for Writ of

Mandamus and Emergency Motion for Stay of Writ complaining of the

Honorable Mickey Pennington, visit ing judge of the County Court at Law

No. 4 of Williamson County, Texas.

David Rogers, of the Law Office of David Rogers, and Matthew

Wilson W ILSON 

### L AW 

### O FFICE 

### , PLLC , attorney s of record for Relator Decker
,
pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. §24.4 00 (a). and the Third Court of AppealsDecker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ 2 

### Local Rules and procedures, file their Opposed Motion for Writ of

Mandamus and E mergenc y Motion for Stay of Writ.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

1. Relator respectfully seeks relief based on exceptional circumstances

and the signific ant timing issues in setting a supersedeas bond after a final

ju dgment order in Williamson County Court

.

2. On June 26, 20 06, Mary Decker purchased her home at 607 M ain

Street, Cedar Park, Texas 78613

. Mary Decker made every monthly

payment and never defaulted on her loan.

3. Nevertheless, the mortgage servicer wrongfully foreclosed and sold

the property to Clifford Homes, LL C. on August 5, 2014 at a foreclosure

sale

.

4. Clifford Homes filed the underlying forcible detain er action, Cause

No. 2JE

- 14

- 0454 in the Williamson County Justice Court. The Justice court

dismissed the forcible detainer suit, and set the bond at $1,500. 1 

### Cliffor d

Homes paid the bond and appealed the decision to Williamson County Court

#4.



### 5. On June 23, 2015, the Honorable Judge Mickey Pennington signed an

order at the County Court granting Clifford Home’s Traditional Motion for

1 See Exhibit A

– Justice Co urt Judgment, Cause #2JE

- 14

- 0454Decker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ 3 

### Summary Judgment. 2 

### Relator’s counsel requested the court set a

supersedeas bond at the hearing on June 23, 2015. The court refused to set a

bond at the hearing. The court’s entry of final judgment did not set a bond.

6. On June 25, 2015, Relator filed a notice of appeal and a motion t o set

bond. 3



### 7. On June 29, 2015, Relator’s counsel went to the County Court and

requested the court clerk to set a hearing to set bond. The court did not set a

hearing and requested Relator’s counsel send the court an email

.

8. On June 29, 2015, Relator’s coun sel sent the County Court Clerk an

email in order to set a timely hearing to set the supersedeas bond. 4



### 9. On June 30
, 2015, the county court clerk responded to the email

requesting each attorney submit arguments and proposed orders to Judge

Pennington by J uly 7, 2015. 5



### 10. The requested submission date is too late and fourteen days after the

entry of final judgment. A judgment of a county court in an eviction suit

may not under any circumstances be stayed pending appeal unless, within 10

days of the signi ng of the judgment, the appellant files a supersedeas bond in

an amount set by the county court. T EX



### . P ROP



### . C ODE 

### §24.007(a).

2 See Exhibit B

– County Court Judgment, Cause #1 5

- 0508

- CC4
3 See Exhibit C

– Notice of Appeal and Motion for Bond Application and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ of Possession Until Bond is Set
4 See Exhibit D

– Email from Relator’s counsel to county court clerk
5 See Exhibit E

– Response email from count y court clerk to attorneysDecker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ 4 

### 11. Relator has made every effort in order to supersede the judgment

pending appeal within the 10 day statutory limit. (Day 10 falls on July 3,

2015, a state and federal holiday preceding a weekend. Under the rules, the

bond is therefore due on there first day not a weekend or holiday, July 6,

2015.)

12. Now, Relator face s imminent irre parable injury 6 

### from losing

possession of her home as a result of the trial court’s abuse of discretion.

Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus and emergency stay are

being so ught by this motion to preserve the status quo.

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

13. Jurisdiction in this mandamus action is mandatory and exclusive in

the Texas Third Court of Appeal. TEX. GOV’T CODE § 22.220, 22.221.

ISSUE PRESENTED

14. Did the trial court abuse its discretion by refusing to set a bond and

failing to give the Relator an opportunity to supersede judgment of a forcible

detainer case pending appeal?

ARGUMENT

15. Relator is facing an impossible position with no adequate remedy at

6 “[E]very piece of real estate is unique, and if foreclosure were allowed before a full determination of the underlying claims, appellees would be irreparably harmed.” Perales v. Riviera, 13

- 03

- 002

- CV, 2003 WL 21705740 (Tex. App . July 24, 2003) citing El Paso Dev. Co. v. Berryman, 729 S.W.2d 883, 888 (Tex.App.

- Corpus Christi 1987, no writ).Decker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ 5 

### law. Relator has made every reasonable effort in order to have the county

court set a supersedeas bond. A judgment of a county court in an eviction

suit may not under any circumstances be stayed pending appeal unless,

within 10 days of the signing of the judgment, the appellant files a

supersedeas bond in an amount set by the county court. T EX



### . P ROP



### . C ODE



### §24.007(a). When a county court fails to set a super sedeas bond, Relator has

no opportunity to supersede the judgment in a forcible detainer case.

16. The prevailing party in a forcible detainer case has no incentive to

have a bo nd set within the statutory ten

- day deadline. To the contrary, the

prevailing p arty would pr efer that no supersedeas bond be set in order to

take possession of the property at the earliest possible opportunity.

17. To compound this problem, a n appellate court's power to stay the

judgment of the county court in a forcible detainer actio n is limited. An

appellate court may not stay the judgment unless a supersedeas bond in

accordance with section 24.007 has been filed. See Tex. Prop. Code

§ 24.007 ; Wilhelm v. Federal Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n , 349 S.W.3d 766, 768 (Tex.

App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.)

.

18. Although the failure to supersede a forcible

- detainer judgment does

not divest a defendant of his right to appea l when the defendant is no longer

in possession of the premises, an appeal from the judgment in that case isDecker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ 6 

### moo t unless the defendant asserts “ a potentially meritorious claim of right to

current, actual possession.” Marshall v. Hous. Auth., 198 S.W.3d 782 , 2006

Tex. LEXIS 193, 49 Tex. Sup. J. 399 (Tex. 2006) ; Wilhelm , 349 S.W.3d at

768.

19. The Third Court has dismissed forcible detainer appeals as moot once

the appellant no longer has possession of the property. Peck v. Fed. Home

Loan Mortg. Corp ., 2013 Te x. App. LEXIS 15154, 2013 WL 6805665 (Tex.

App. Austin Dec. 18, 2013)

20. The current statutory scheme and jurisprudence in for cible detainer

cases force parties like the Relator into a position where they have don’t

have an adequate remedy on appeal
, and once they do appeal the controversy

is moot because they have already lost possession of their property.

21. Relator should not lose possession of her home and lose the chance to

supersede the county court’s judgment, because the trial court refuses to set

a bon d in the ten day limit to pay the bond required by statute.

Mandamus is appropriate relief

22. In order to be entitled to mandamus relief, Relator must meet two

requirements: (1) the trial court must have clearly abused its discretion and

(2) there must be an absence of an adequate remedy at law. In re Prudential

Ins. Co. of Am. , 148 S.W.3d 124, 135

- 36 (Tex. 2004) This case satisfiesDecker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ 7 

### both requirements.

23. Because mandamus is an “extraordinary remedy,” it is available only

in limited circumstances when necessary to “correct a clear abuse of

discretion or the violation of a duty imposed by law when there is no other

adequate remedy by law” [ CSR Ltd. v. Link , 925 S.W.2d 591, 596 (Tex.

1996) (quoting Johnson v. Fourth Court of Appeals
, 700 S.W.2d 916, 917

(Tex. 1985)) ; see also Republican Party of Texas v. Dietz , 940 S.W.2d 86,

88 (Tex. 1997) ; Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 839

– 844 (Tex. 1992) ].

24. T he t rial court has abused its discretion by not setting a supersedeas

bond within ten days of the final judgment required by T EX



### . P ROP



### . C ODE



### §24.007(a). The trial court refused to set a bond when requested at the

hearing on June 23, 2015. The court h as not set the bond after Relator filed

a motion requesting bond and notice of appeal , and the court has not set a

hearing after being requested with in the time period required by statute.

This independent abuse of discretion has deprived Relator of an ad equate

remedy at law. Relator has no remedy at law to supersede the county court

judgment.

25. Mandamu s has been issued to require the trial court to lower the

amount of a supersedeas bond

. Isern v. Ninth Court of Appeals, 925 S.W.2d

604, 606 (Tex. 1996)

. When a county court sets an unclear supersedeasDecker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ 8 

### bond they have been instructed to specify the amount and terms for

suspending enforceme nt of the judgment pending appeal. Knepp v. K.R.A.K.

Invs., LLC, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 3699, 2014 WL 1464978 (Tex. App.

Austin Apr. 8, 2014)

Mandamus is an available and required remedy because there is no adequate remedy by appeal

26. Setting no supersedeas bond is more detrimental, because when the

court refuses to set a bond, neither party has been adequately informed of the

terms on which the underlying judgment may be superseded pending appeal.

27. Relator made every payment on her loan, and was foreclosed up on

due to no fault of her own. Now she is facing an imminent eviction due to

the trial court’s failure to set a timely bond. She will be forced from her

home without even the opportunity to post a supersedeas bond to suspend

the writ of possession.

28. Unles s the writ of possession is stayed, this Court’s jurisdiction to

consider the m erits of Appellants appeal will be vitiated.

29. Now, Relator face imminent irre parable injury from losing her home

on July 6, 2015, as a result of the trial court’s abuse of discre tion

. Accordingly, the petition for mandamus and emergency stay being sought

are the only adequate remedies available to Relator

.
PrayerDecker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ 9 

### 30. A ppellants respectfully request this C ourt rule on this mo tion by July

6, 2015 , because the circumstances involve an e mergency. Appellants

request that this Court grant their petition for mandamus and emergency

motion to stay the impending writ of possession.

Respectfully submitted,

Matthew Wilson , Attorney at Law

__/s/ Matthew Wilson

___________ M atthew Wilson



### Texas Bar No. 24079588 W ILSON 

### L AW 

### O FFICE 

### , PLLC 1201 Spyglass Drive Suite 100 Austin, TX 78746 MWilson@matthewwilsonlaw.

com Telephone: 903

- 705

- 2540 Fax: 512

- 777

- 5988

David Rogers Texas Bar No. 24014089 L AW 

### O FFICE OF 

### D AVID 

### R OGERS 

### 1201 Spyglass Drive Suite 10 0 Austin, TX 78746 Firm@DARogersLaw.com Telephone: 512

- 923

- 1836 Fax: 512

- 777

- 5988Decker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ 10 

### CERTIFICATE OF NOTICE & SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion was served by the Court’s online filing system on this the 2 nd 

### day of July
, 2015 , to:

Dr. J. Hyde, THE J. HYDE LAW OFFICE, PLLC 111 E. 17th Street #12015 Austin. Texas 78711 Phone: (512) 200

- 4080 Fax: (512) 582

- 8295 E

- mail: jhyde@jhydelaw.com

Attorney for Appellee / Real Party in Interest

_/s/ Davi d Rogers

________ _ David RogersDecker

– Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion to Stay Writ 11 

### CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4(i), I hereby certi fy that this document contains 1,700 words.

__/s/__David Rogers___________ David Rogers SBN 24014089 Law Office of David Rogers 1201 Spyglass Suite 100 Austin, TX 78746 (512) 923

- 1836 (512) 777

- 5988 [Facsimile] Firm@DARogersLaw.com

### No. 03

- 15

- 00393

- CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARY DECKER, Relator

Origin al Proceeding from the County Court at Law #4, Williamson County, Texas; Cause No. 15

- 0508

- CC4

Styled “Clifford Homes, LLC.

v. Mary Decker and Christopher Decker and/or all other occupants of 1607 Main St.”

Ho n. Mickey R. Pennington , Presiding Judge

RELATOR ’ S APPENDIX OF ATTACHMENTS

ITEM A Judgment of the Justice Court

ITEM B Judgment of the County Court

ITEM C Notice of Appeal and Motion for Bond Application

ITEM D Email from Relator’s counsel to county court clerk

ITEM E Response email from county court clerk to counsel

# ITEM A Judgment of the Justice Court

# ITEM B Judgment of the County CourtCAUSE 

### NO.ls-050&CC4

CLIFFORD HOMES, LLC,

Plaintiff,

MARYDECKER, CHRISTOPHER DECKER, and/or 

### AIL OTHER OCCUPANTS OF
1607 

### MAIN STREET, CEDAR PARK, TEXAS 78613,

Defendants. IN THE COIJNTY 

### COI]RI'AT LAW

NUMBER4

WILLIAMSON COLINTY, TEXAS $
$
$
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

ORDER GRANTING 

### PLAINTIFF'S TRADITIONAL MOTION FOR SUMIV1ARY

JUDGMEI{T AND ENTRY OF F'INAL JUDGMENT

On the 23rd day of June, 2015, came to be heard 

### Plaintiffs Traditional Motion for Summary Judgment 

### ("Motion"). Having heard the arguments 

### of counsel aad having reviewed the parties' briefing on the Motion and the record evidence, the Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on its claim for forcible detainer, as Plaintiff
has proven as a matter of law that 

### it is entitled to immediate possession of the premises looated at 1607 Main Sffeet, Cedar Park, Texas 78613.



### IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Plaintiff, CLIFFORD HOMES, LLC,

recover from the Defendants MARY DECKER, CHRISTOPHER DECKER, and/or 

### ALL OTI{ER OCCUPANTS OF 1607 

### MAIN STREET, CEDAR PARK, TEXAS 78613, AS follows:

Possesgion of the premises at 160? Main Steet, Cedar Park, Texas 78613.

Court costs.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is entitled to a return of the cash appeal bond 

### filed by Plaintiff 

### in the amount 

### of $1,500.00. The clerk's 

### office is ordered to RELEASE this cash bond to 

### Plaintiff. This is a FINAL ruDGMENT.

Siened 

# this ? 

# 3 day 

# of -fu-, ,2015 

### L

2.



### FILED at 

### /o sY o'chdt---l-il A!)
JUN 2 

### 3 2915 

# iJo^qERU

counU Gte*H;lrieffEnh co,r r Honoragl6 Judge Pr6siding

# ITEM C Notice of Appeal and Motion for Bond ApplicationCAUSE NO. 1 5

- 0 508

- C C4

CLIFFORD HOMES, LLC., § IN THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW § Plaintiff
, § §

v. § § MARY DECKER, § NUMBER 4 CHRISTOPHER DECKER, and/or § ALL OTHER OCCUPANTS OF § 1607 MAIN STREET, § CEDAR PARK, TEXAS 78613 § § Defendants

. § WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS § DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF APPEAL
COMES NOW Mary Decker, Defendant, and notices this court that she will appeal this court’s order of June 23, 2015.

Introduction

1. Plaintiff is C lifford Homes, LLC

2. Defendants are Mary Decker and Christopher Decker and All Other
Occupants.

3. This is an appeal from Justice of the Peace Precinct 2.

4. May 7, 2015 Plaintiff’s filed their Motion for Summary Judgment.

5. June 17, 2015 Defendant filed her Respons e to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

6. A hearing was held in this matter on June 23, 2015.

Facts

7. The Honorable Mick e y Pennington signed his order in favor of Plaintiff’s Summary Judgment on June 23, 2015.

8. Defendant desires to appeal and files this notice.

9. The appeal is taken to the Third Court of Appeals. Filed: 6/25/2015 4:47:56 PM Nancy E. Rister, County Clerk Williamson County, Texas By: Regina Cockrell, Deputy Clerk10. Defendant has filed her request for supersedeas bond separately from this

notice.

11. A copy of the judgment to be appealed is attached to this notice as

“Attachment 1”.

Respectfully submitted,

___ /s/ David Rogers

______________ David Rogers State Bar #24014089 L AW O FFICE OF D AVID R OGERS 1201 Spyglass Drive, Suite 100 Austin, TX 78746 Firm@DARogersLaw.com Tel. (5 12) 923

- 1836 Fax (512) 777

- 5988 Matthew Wilson State Bar #24079588 W I LSON L AW O FFICE , PLLC MWilson@MatthewWilsonLaw.com Attorneys for Mary Decker

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing notice was served upon all parties of record in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on this 25th day of June , 2015

.

__/s/ David Rogers

___________ David Rogers State Bar #24014089 Attorney for Mary Decker

The J. Hyde Law Office, PLLC Dr. J. Hyde 111 E. 17 th Street #12015 Austin, Texas 78711 Phone: (512) 200

- 4080 Fax: (512) 582

- 8295

# Attachment 1CAUSE 

### NO.ls-050&CC4

CLIFFORD HOMES, LLC,

Plaintiff,

MARYDECKER, CHRISTOPHER DECKER, and/or 

### AIL OTHER OCCUPANTS OF
1607 

### MAIN STREET, CEDAR PARK, TEXAS 78613,

Defendants. IN THE COIJNTY 

### COI]RI'AT LAW

NUMBER4

WILLIAMSON COLINTY, TEXAS $
$
$
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

ORDER GRANTING 

### PLAINTIFF'S TRADITIONAL MOTION FOR SUMIV1ARY

JUDGMEI{T AND ENTRY OF F'INAL JUDGMENT

On the 23rd day of June, 2015, came to be heard 

### Plaintiffs Traditional Motion for Summary Judgment 

### ("Motion"). Having heard the arguments 

### of counsel aad having reviewed the parties' briefing on the Motion and the record evidence, the Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on its claim for forcible detainer, as Plaintiff
has proven as a matter of law that 

### it is entitled to immediate possession of the premises looated at 1607 Main Sffeet, Cedar Park, Texas 78613.



### IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Plaintiff, CLIFFORD HOMES, LLC,

recover from the Defendants MARY DECKER, CHRISTOPHER DECKER, and/or 

### ALL OTI{ER OCCUPANTS OF 1607 

### MAIN STREET, CEDAR PARK, TEXAS 78613, AS follows:

Possesgion of the premises at 160? Main Steet, Cedar Park, Texas 78613.

Court costs.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is entitled to a return of the cash appeal bond 

### filed by Plaintiff 

### in the amount 

### of $1,500.00. The clerk's 

### office is ordered to RELEASE this cash bond to 

### Plaintiff. This is a FINAL ruDGMENT.

Siened 

# this ? 

# 3 day 

# of -fu-, ,2015 

### L

2.



### FILED at 

### /o sY o'chdt---l-il A!)
JUN 2 

### 3 2915 

# iJo^qERU

counU Gte*H;lrieffEnh co,r r Honoragl6 Judge Pr6sidingCAUSE NO. 1 5

- 0 508

- C C4

CLIFFORD HOMES, LLC., § IN THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW § Plaintiff
, § §

v. § § MARY DECKER, § NUMBER 4 CHRISTOPHER DECKER, and/or § ALL OTHER OCCUPANTS OF § 1607 MAIN STREET, § CEDAR PARK, TEXAS 78613 § § Defendants

. § WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS §

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR BO ND APPLICATION AND EMERGENCY MOTION TO STAY WRIT OF POSSESSION UNTIL BOND IS SET

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
COMES NOW, Defendant Mary Decker, Defendant/Occupant of the property
located at 1607 Main Street, Cedar Park, Texas 78613, and files this defendant’s motion for bond application and clarification and emergency motion to stay writ of possession

until bond is set

.

SUMMARY

1. On June 23, 20 15, the Honorable Judge Mickey Pennington signed an order granting Plaintiff’s Traditional Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant moves the

Court to clarify the County Court’s judgment dated June 23, 2015 as follows. The court’s entry of final judgment d id not set a bond. See Exhibit A. Defendant’s counsel requested the court set a bond at the hearing on June 23, 2015. The court refused to set a

bond at the hearing

.

2. Defendant pe rfected this appeal on June 25 , 2015, by filing a notice of appeal.

“ An appeal is perfected when a written notice of appeal is filed with the trial court clerk. The filing of a notice of appeal by any party invokes the appellate court’s jurisdiction Filed: 6/25/2015 4:42:37 PM Nancy E. Rister, County Clerk Williamson County, Texas By: Regina Cockrell, Deputy Clerkover all parties to the trial court’s judgment or order appealed from.” Se e Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(a)(b).

3. Defendant is unable to ascertain from the county court’s judgment how or whether a supersedeas bond was calculated, what the total amount of the bond is, or how the bond must be satisfied. The bond conditions are impermiss ibly vague and ambiguous because the court never set a bond. As a result of this ambiguity, neither the Plaintiff nor Defendant have been adequately informed of the terms on which the underlying judgment may be superseded pending appeal.

4. Defendant ther efore requests the county court to specify the precise amount and terms of the security required to suspend enforcement of the judgment on appeal.

D efendant requests tha t a bond be set at five hundred dollar s ($500) to avoid any ambiguities over whether a bond has been set and paid. See Tex. R. App. P. 24.3(a) (trial court has continuing jurisdiction to order amount and type of security even after that court’s plenary power has otherwise expired). See Tex. R. App. P. 44.4 (a) (governing trial court’s remedial error when failure or refusal to act prevents the proper presentation of a case to the court of appeals). See Tex. R. App. P. 44.1 (2) (governing standard for reversible error when the error prevents the appellant from properly presenting the case to the court of appeals).

5. With defendant’s filing of her notice of appeal, she declares her intention to appeal and does not waive her right to supersede the judgment until a bond has been set.

Plaintiff’ s failure to request a bond to protect the judgment and the court’s refusal to set a

bond at the hearing in no way reflec ts defendant’s waiver of her legal right to have the trial court’s judgment superseded pending appeal to the court of appeals.

REASONABLE BOND TO BE SET

T EX

. C IV

. P RAC & R EM

. C ODE §52.0 06 is explicit about protecting money

judgments. 1 No evidence was introduced by Clifford Homes at any time that it was

1 § 52.006. Amount of Security for Money Judgment

(a) Subject to Subsection (b), when a judgment is for money, the amountincurring any money damages, that it had suffered any money damages, or that it was

likely to suffer any money damage in the future. Had Clifford Homes introduced such

evidence, and had the Court ruled that an award of damage were appropr i ate, the Court

would have been limited by T EX

. C IV

. P RAC & R EM

. C ODE §52.006 (b):

(b) Notwithstanding any other law or rule of court, when a judgment is for money, the amount of security must not exceed the lesser of:

(1) 50 percent of the j udgment debtor's net worth; or (2) $ 25 million.
Clifford Homes has presented no evidence. 2 There is no testimony before the court, and

no affidavits or self

- authenticating documents that could support a large request for bond

in this case.

6. The clea r intent 3 4 of Clifford Home’s is to set the Appellant’s bond at an amount

that would shut the courthouse door and force the Defendant to give up her home and

give up her rights without the opportunity for full and final adjudication of her claims by

the Ap pellate courts.

of security must equal the sum of:...

2 “[ P]leadings , even if sworn, are not evidence. See Laidlaw Waste Sys., Inc. v. City of Wilmer , 904 S.W.2d 656, 660, 38 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 973 (Tex. 1995). Further, an attorney's opening argument is not evidence

. Weslaco Federation of Teachers v. Texas Educ. Agency , 27 S .W.3d 258, 263 (Tex. App.

-- Austin 2000, no pet.).” Schade v. Rhodes , 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 5419, 8 (Tex. App. Houston 1st Dist. June 17, 2004) “However, counsel's argument is not evidence

. See Chase v. State, 750 S.W.2d 41, 43 (Tex. App.

-- Fort Worth 1988, pe t. ref'd).” Bolden v. State , 1997 Tex. App. LEXIS 409, 9 (Tex. App. Dallas Jan. 31, 1997)

3 Plaintiff’s counsel has stated that there is no amount of bond that his client would accept.

4 This is in contrast to the judgment at the justice court. Defendant prevailed, the court set at $1,500 bond, and the Plaintiff exercised its legal right to pay the bond and supersede the judgment pending appeal. Defendant is entitled to the same legal protections.NET WORTH BOND CAP

7. According to T EX

. C IV

. P RAC & R EM

. C ODE § 52.006, amount of bond may not

exceed fifty percent of net worth. Mary Decker has an actual net worth of negative

- $88,040.66. ( See Exhibit B, attached Affidavit and Net Worth Calculation).

8. The Austin Court of Appeals has recently endorsed the method of limiting bond

caps requested by Defendants.

To suspend a money judgment pending appeal in a civil case, section 52.006, subsection (a), of the civil practice and remedies code requires that a judgment debtor furnish a bond, deposit, or other security in an amount "equal [to] the sum of: (1) the amount of compensatory damages awarded in the judgment; (2) interest for the estimated dur ation of the appeal; and (3) costs awarded in the judgment." T EX

. C IV

. P RAC

. & R EM

. C ODE A NN . § 52.006(a); see T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 24.2(a)(1) (rule implementing section 52.006, subsection (a)). This amount, however, may not exceed the lesser of fifty percent o f the judgment debtor's current net worth or $ 25 million. T EX

. C IV

. P RAC

. & R EM

. C ODE A NN . § 52.006(b); see T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 24.2(a)(1). Additionally, if the trial court finds that the judgment debtor is likely to suffer "substantial economic harm" from po sting security in the amount otherwise required, the court "shall lower the amount of the security to an amount that will not cause the judgment debtor substantial economic harm." T EX

. C IV

. P RAC

. & R EM

. C ODE A NN . § 52.006(c); see Tex. R. App. P. 24.2(b).

Shook v. Walden , 304 S.W.3d 910, 914 (Tex. App.

-- Austin 2010)

9. Black’s Law Dictionary defines net worth as “the amount by which assets exceed

liabilities” or “remainder after deduction of liabilities from assets” or the difference

between total assets and liabilities of individual, corporation, etc.” BLACK’S LAW

DICTIONARY at 1041 (6 th ed. 1990).

1 0

. In EnviroPower, LLC v Bear Sterns & Co., Inc. 265 S.W. 3d 1 4

- 5 (Tex App.

-
Houston [1 st Dist.] 2008), the court defines “Net Worth” for purposes of sett i ng asupersedeas bond as the difference between total assets and total liabilities as determined

by generally accepted accounting principals at the time the bond is set. See also LMC

Complet e Automotive Inc. v Burke, 229 S.W.3d 469, 482 (Tex App

- Houston [1 st Dist.]

2007); Texas Custom Pools, Inc. v. Clayton, 293 SW3d 299 (Tex. App.

— El Paso 2009)

. The Dallas Court of Appeals calculated net worth by taking the difference between the

assets and liabilities as shown on the judgment debtor’s balance sheet and held that its net

worth was negative. Therefore, the court of appeals ordered the security set at zero. 5

G.M. Houser, Inc. v Rodgers, 204 S.W. 3 rd 836, 846 (Tex App

- Dallas 2006, no pet.)

11

. Pursuant to T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 24.2(c)(1), Mary Decker’s affidavit, with assets and

liabilities detailed, show a net worth of less than zero. A judgment debtor who provides a

bond, deposit, or security under Rule 24.2(a)(1)(A) in an amount based on the debtor's

net worth must simultaneously file an affidavit that states the debtor's net worth and

states complete, detailed i nformation concerning the debtor's assets and liabilities from

which net wor th can be ascerta i ned. T EX .R.A PP .P . 24.2(c)(1). Mary Dec ker has provided

such an analysis. The attached affidavit and analysis shows that she has a net w orth of

negative (

- $88,040.60 ) . Defendant requests the court se t the supersedeas bond at $500.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant, Mary Decker , prays that

this honorable Court grant Defendant’s Motion for Bo nd Application and Motion to Stay

5 On this record, we conclude the net worth of G.M. Houser , Ltd. is a negative $ 333,516 and the net worth of Houser Materials, L.L.C. is $ 2688. We reverse and render the trial court's June 30, 2006 order fixing security for supersedeas. Therefore, we order that the security for supersedeas for G.M. Houser, Ltd. is set at $ 0, and the security for supersedeas for Houser Materials, L.L.C. is set at $ 1344, which is fifty percent of Houser Materials, L.L.C.'s net worth.Writ of Possession until bond is set.

Respectfully submitted,

___ /s/ David Rogers

______________ David Rogers State Bar #24014089 L AW O FFICE OF D AVID R OGERS 1201 Spyglass Drive, Suite 100 Austin, TX 78746 Firm@DARogersLaw.com Tel. (512) 923

- 1836 Fax (512) 777

- 5988

Matthew Wilson State Bar #24079588 W ILSON L AW O FFICE , PLLC MWilson@MatthewWilsonLaw.com Attorneys for Mary Decker

CERTIFICATE OF SE RVICE
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served
up on all parties of record in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on this 25th d a y of June, 2015.

__/s/ David Rogers

__ _________ David Rogers State Bar #24014089 Attorney for Mary Decker

The J. Hyde Law Office, PLLC D r. J. Hyde 111 E. 17 th Street #12015 Austin, Texas 78711 Phone: (512) 200

- 4080 Fax: (512) 582

- 8295 Attorney for Clifford Homes , LLC

.CAUSE 

### NO.ls-050&CC4

CLIFFORD HOMES, LLC,

Plaintiff,

MARYDECKER, CHRISTOPHER DECKER, and/or 

### AIL OTHER OCCUPANTS OF
1607 

### MAIN STREET, CEDAR PARK, TEXAS 78613,

Defendants. IN THE COIJNTY 

### COI]RI'AT LAW

NUMBER4

WILLIAMSON COLINTY, TEXAS $
$
$
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

ORDER GRANTING 

### PLAINTIFF'S TRADITIONAL MOTION FOR SUMIV1ARY

JUDGMEI{T AND ENTRY OF F'INAL JUDGMENT

On the 23rd day of June, 2015, came to be heard 

### Plaintiffs Traditional Motion for Summary Judgment 

### ("Motion"). Having heard the arguments 

### of counsel aad having reviewed the parties' briefing on the Motion and the record evidence, the Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on its claim for forcible detainer, as Plaintiff
has proven as a matter of law that 

### it is entitled to immediate possession of the premises looated at 1607 Main Sffeet, Cedar Park, Texas 78613.



### IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Plaintiff, CLIFFORD HOMES, LLC,

recover from the Defendants MARY DECKER, CHRISTOPHER DECKER, and/or 

### ALL OTI{ER OCCUPANTS OF 1607 

### MAIN STREET, CEDAR PARK, TEXAS 78613, AS follows:

Possesgion of the premises at 160? Main Steet, Cedar Park, Texas 78613.

Court costs.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is entitled to a return of the cash appeal bond 

### filed by Plaintiff 

### in the amount 

### of $1,500.00. The clerk's 

### office is ordered to RELEASE this cash bond to 

### Plaintiff. This is a FINAL ruDGMENT.

Siened 

# this ? 

# 3 day 

# of -fu-, ,2015 

### L

2.



### FILED at 

### /o sY o'chdt---l-il A!)
JUN 2 

### 3 2915 

# iJo^qERU

counU Gte*H;lrieffEnh co,r r Honoragl6 Judge Pr6siding

# ITEM D Email from Relator’s counsel to county court clerkC h a r l o t t e S e c o r d < c h a r l o t t e

. s e c o r d @ g m a i l

. c o m >



### F w d : B o n d : C l i f f o r d H o m e s v

. M a r y D e c k e r ; 1 5

­ 0 8 0 4

­ C C 4
1 m e s s a g e

M a t t h e w W i l s o n < m w i l s o n @ m a t t h e w w i l s o n l a w

. c o m > T h u , J u l 2

, 2 0 1 5 a t 1 0 : 4 3 A M T o : D a v i d R o g e r s < d a r o g e r s @ a o l

. c o m >
, C h a r l o t t e S e c o r d < c h a r l o t t e

. s e c o r d @ g m a i l

. c o m >

B e g i n f o r

w a r d e d m e s s a g e :

F r o m : M a t t h e w W i l s o n < m w i l s o n @ m a t t h e w w i l s o n l a w

. c o m > S u b j e c t : B o n d : C l i f f o r d H o m e s v

. M a r y D e c k e r ; 1 5

- 0 8 0 4

- C C 4 D a t e : J u n e 2 9

, 2 0 1 5 1 : 0 3 : 3 2 P M C D T T o : " S T h r e a d g i l l @ w i l c o

. o r g " < S T h r e a d g i l l @ w i l c o

. o r g > C c : D a v i d R o g e r s < d a r o g e r s @ a o l

. c o m > , " D r

. J

. H y d e " < j h y d e @ j h y d e l a w

. c o m >

H i M r s T h r e a d g i l l

,

T h i s e m a i l i s t o r e q u e s t a h e a r i n g t o s e t a b o n d i n t h e f o r c i b l e d e t a i n e r c a s e : 1 5

­ 0 5 0 9

­ C C 4

. T h e v i s i t i n g j u d g e g r a n t e d s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t o n J u n e 2 3 r d a n d d i d n o t s e t a b o n d d e s p i t e a s p e c i f i c r e q u e s t f o r b o n d

. A n o t i c e o f a p p e a l

, m o t i o n t o s e t b o n d

, a n d a m o t i o n t o
s t a y w r i t o f p o s s e s s i o n w e r e f i l e d i n t h i s c a s e l a s t w e e k

. I h a v e t h r e e s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s i n t h i s c a s e

.

1 ) W i l l a h e a r i n g b e s e t t h i s w e e k i n o r d e r t o s e t b o n d ? 2 ) I f a h e a r i n g c a n n o t b e s e t t h i s w e e k b e f o r e t h e t e n d a y d e a d l i n e , c a n a n o m i n a l b o n d b e s e t u n t i l t h e c o u r t c a n s e t a h e a r i n g t o s e t b o n d ? 3 ) W i l l t h e c o u r t a l l o w a w r i t o f p o s s e s s i o n t o i s s u e i n i n s t a n c e s w h e r e a b o n d h a s n o t b e e n s e t a n d a n o t i c e o f a p p e a l h a s b e e n f i l e d w i t h t h e c o u r t ?

T h a n k s ,



## M a t t h e w L

. W i l s o n

W i l s o n L a w O f

f

i c e , P L L C

### A t t

o r n e y a t L a w 5 1 2

. 2 0 1

. 4 5 1 9 D i r e c t 5 1 2

. 9 2 3

. 1 8 3 6 O f

f

i c e 5 1 2

. 2 0 1

. 4 0 8 2 E

­ F a

x M W i l s o n @ M a t t h e w W i l s o n L a w

. c o m M a t t h e w W i l s o n L a w . c o m 

### S

e r v i n g W i t

h H o n o r

C O N

F

I D

E

N

T

I A L I T

Y N O T I

C

E : T h i

s e m a i l c o m m u n i c a t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g a n y a t t a c h e d d o c u m e n t ( s ) ) m a y c o n t a i n i n f

o r m a t i o n t h a t i s c o n f

i d

e n t i a l

, p r o p r i e t a r y a n d / o r
p r i v i l e g e d

. T h e i n f

o r m a t i o n i s i n t e n d e d f o r t h e s o l e u s e o f t

h e i n d i c a t e d a d d

r e s s e e ( s )

. I f

y o u a r e n o t a n i n t e n d e d r e c i p i e n t o f t

h i

s e m a i l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , p l e a s e b e

a d

v i

s e d t h a t a n y d i s c l o s u r e , c o p

y i n g , d i s t r i b u t i o n o r o t h e r u s e o f t

h i

s c o m m u n i c a t i o n o r a n y a t t a c h e d d o c u m e n t i s s t r i c t l y p r o h i b i t e d

. M o r e o v e r , a n y s u c h i n a d v e r t e n t d i

s c l o s u r e s h a l l n o t c o m p r o m i s e o r w a i v e t h e a t t o r n e y

­ c l i e n t p r i v i l e g e a s t o t h i

s c o m m u n i c a t i o n o r o t h e r w i s e

. I f

y o u h a v e r e c e i v e d t h i

s f

a

x c o m m u n i c a t i o n i n e r r o r , p l e a s e n o t i f y t h e s e n d e r i m m e d i a t e l y b y e

­ m a i l ( m w i l s o n @ m a t t h e w w i l s o n l a w

. c o m )

, a n d p r o m p t l y d e s t r o y a l l c o p i e s o f t

h i

s c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d a n y a t t a c h e d
d

o c u m e n t ( s )

. T h a n k y o u

.

P a s t e d G r a p h i c ­ 2

­ 4 c o p y

. t i f f2 2 K

# ITEM E Response email from county court clerk to counselC h a r l o t t e S e c o r d < c h a r l o t t e

. s e c o r d @ g m a i l

. c o m >



### F w d : C a u s e N o

. 1 5

­ 0 8 0 4

­ C C 4 ; B o n d : C l i f f o r d H o m e s v

. M a r y D e c k e r 1 m e s s a g e

M a t t h e w W i l s o n < m w i l s o n @ m a t t h e w w i l s o n l a w

. c o m > T h u , J u l 2

, 2 0 1 5 a t 1 0 : 4 4 A M T o : D a v i d R o g e r s < d a r o g e r s @ a o l

. c o m >
, C h a r l o t t e S e c o r d < c h a r l o t t e

. s e c o r d @ g m a i l

. c o m >

B e g i n f o r

w a r d e d m e s s a g e :

F r o m : S h a r r i o n T h r e a d g i l l < s t h r e a d g i l l @ w i l c o

. o r g > S u b j e c t : C a u s e N o

. 1 5

- 0 8 0 4

- C C 4 ; B o n d : C l i f f o r d H o m e s v

. M a r y D e c k e r D a t e : J u n e 3 0

, 2 0 1 5 1 0 : 0 2 : 4 4 A M C D T T o : " D r

. J

. H y d e " < j h y d e @ j h y d e l a w

. c o m > , M a t t h e w W i l s o n < m w i l s o n @ m a t t h e w w i l s o n l a w

. c o m > C c : D a v i d R o g e r s < d a r o g e r s @ a o l

. c o m >

G e n t l e m e n

–

J u d g e P e n n i n g t o n h a s r e q u e s t e d e a c h a t t o r n e y s u b m i t a p r o p o s e d O r d e r a l o n g w i t h w r i t t e n a r g u m e n t a n d h e w i l l p r o v i d e a

r

u l i n g

. Y o u r a r g u m e n t s a l o n g w i t h p r o p o s e d O r d e r s s h o u l d b e s ub m i t t e d o n o r b e f o r e J u l y 7 t h

.

S h o u l d y o u h a v e a n y q u e s t i o n s , p l e a s e c o n t a c t m e

.

­ ­ ­ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - S h a r r i o n T h r e a d g i l l
, C o u r t A d m i n i s t r a t o r W i l l i a m s o n C o u n t y C o u r t a t L a w # 4 4 0 5 M a r t i n L u t h e r K i n g , B o x 1 7 G e o r g e t o w n , T e x a s 7 8 6 2 6 5 1 2

­ 9 4 3

­ 1 6 8 1 5 1 2

­ 9 4 3

­ 1 6 8 5 f a x S T h r e a d g i l l @ w i l c o

. o r gF r o m : D r

. J

. H y d e [ m a i l t o : j h y d e @ j h y d e l a w

. c o m ] S e n t : M o n d a y , J u n e 2 9 , 2 0 1 5 1 : 5 5 P M T o : M a t t h e w W i l s o n C c : S h a r r i o n T h r e a d g i l l ; D a v i d R o g e r s S u b j e c t : R e : B o n d : C l i f f o r d H o m e s v

. M a r y D e c k e r ; 1 5

­ 0 8 0 4

­ C C 4

D e a r M s

. T h r e a d g i l l
,

W e c e r t a i n l y d o n o t o p p o s e a q u i c k h e a r i n g

. H o w e v e r , i n t h e i n t e r e s t o f s a v i n g a l l p a r t i e s t i m e a n d

e x p e n s e , a s w e l l a s t h e c o n v e n i e n c e o f t h e v i s i t i n g j u d g e , w e b e l i e v e t h e b o n d r e q u e s t c a n b e

r e s o l v e d b a s e d o n t h e w r i t t e n s u b m i s s i o n s a n d a c c o m p a n y i n g e v i d e n c e

. A t t h i s p o i n t , i t s e e m s t h a t a n y t e s t i m o n y a t t h e h e a r i n g w o u l d b e d u p l i c a t i v e o f w h a t h a s a l r e a d y b e e n s u b m i t t e d

. I n
a n y e v e n t , w e r e c o g n i z e t h e t i m e
­ s e n s i t i v e n a t u r e o f D e f e n d a n t ' s r e q u e s t , a s t h e s t a t u t o r y d e a d l i n e f o r D e f e n d a n t t o s u s p e n d e n f o r c e m e n t o f t h e j u d g m e n t p e n d i n g a p p e a l i s 6 J u l y 2 0 1 5

. T h a n k y o u

.

J

O n M o n , J u n 2 9
, 2 0 1 5 a t 1 : 0 3 P M
, M a t t h e w W i l s o n < m w i l s o n @ m a t t h e w w i l s o n l a w

. c o m > w r o t e : H i M r s T h r e a d g i l l

,

T h i s e m a i l i s t o r e q u e s t a h e a r i n g t o s e t a b o n d i n t h e f o r c i b l e d e t a i n e r c a s e : 1 5

­ 0 5 0 9

­ C C 4

. T h e v i s i t i n g j u d g e g r a n t e d

s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t o n J u n e 2 3 r d a n d d i d n o t s e t a b o n d d e s p i t e a s p e c i f i c r e q u e s t f o r b o n d

. A n o t i c e o f a p p e a l

, m o t i o n t o s e t b o n d

, a n d a m o t i o n t o s t a y w r i t o f p o s s e s s i o n w e r e f i l e d i n t h i s c a s e l a s t w e e k

. I h a v e t h r e e s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s i n t h i s c a s e

.

1 ) W i l l a h e a r i n g b e s e t t h i s w e e k i n o r d e r t o s e t b o n d ? 2 ) I f a h e a r i n g c a n n o t b e s e t t h i s w e e k b e f o r e t h e t e n d a y d e a d l i n e , c a n a n o m i n a l b o n d b e s e t u n t i l t h e c o u r t c a n s e t a h e a r i n g t o s e t b o n d ? 3 ) W i l l t h e c o u r t a l l o w a w r i t o f p o s s e s s i o n t o i s s u e i n i n s t a n c e s w h e r e a b o n d h a s n o t b e e n s e t a n d a n o t i c e o f a p p e a l h a s b e e n f i l e d w i t h t h e c o u r t ?T h a n k s ,



## M a t t h e w L

. W i l s o n

W i l s o n L a w O f

f

i c e , P L L C
A t t

o r n e y a t L a w 5 1 2

. 2 0 1

. 4 5 1 9 D i r e c t 5 1 2

. 9 2 3

. 1 8 3 6 O f

f

i c e 5 1 2

. 2 0 1

. 4 0 8 2 E

­ F a

x M W i l s o n @ M a t t h e w W i l s o n L a w

. c o m M a t t h e w W i l s o n L a w . c o m 

### S

e r v i n g W i t

h H o n o r

C O N

F

I D

E

N

T

I A L I T

Y N O T I

C

E : T h i

s e m a i l c o m m u n i c a t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g a n y a t t a c h e d d o c u m e n t ( s ) ) m a y c o n t a i n i n f

o r m a t i o n t h a t i s c o n f

i d

e n t i a l

, p r o p r i e t a r y a n d / o r
p r i v i l e g e d

. T h e i n f

o r m a t i o n i s i n t e n d e d f o r t h e s o l e u s e o f t

h e i n d i c a t e d a d d

r e s s e e ( s )

. I f

y o u a r e n o t a n i n t e n d e d r e c i p i e n t o f t

h i

s e m a i l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , p l e a s e b e

a d

v i

s e d t h a t a n y d i s c l o s u r e , c o p

y i n g , d i s t r i b u t i o n o r o t h e r u s e o f t

h i

s c o m m u n i c a t i o n o r a n y a t t a c h e d d o c u m e n t i s s t r i c t l y p r o h i b i t e d

. M o r e o v e r , a n y s u c h i n a d v e r t e n t d i

s c l o s u r e s h a l l n o t c o m p r o m i s e o r w a i v e t h e a t t o r n e y

­ c l i e n t p r i v i l e g e a s t o t h i

s c o m m u n i c a t i o n o r o t h e r w i s e

. I f

y o u h a v e r e c e i v e d t h i

s f

a

x c o m m u n i c a t i o n i n e r r o r ,p l e a s e n o t i f y t h e s e n d e r i m m e d i a t e l y b y e

­ m a i l ( m w i l s o n @ m a t t h e w w i l s o n l a w

. c o m )

, a n d p r o m p t l y d e s t r o y a l l c o p i e s o f t

h i

s c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d a n y a t t a c h e d
d

o c u m e n t ( s )

. T h a n k y o u

.

­ ­ D r . J

. H Y D E T h e J

. H Y D E L a w O f f i c e , P L L C 1 1 1 E

. 1 7 t h S t

. # 1 2 0 1 5 A u s t i n , T e x a s 7 8 7 1 1 T : 5 1 2

. 2 0 0

. 4 0 8 0 F : 5 1 2

. 5 8 2

. 8 2 9 5 E : j h y d e @ j h y d e l a w

. c o m

C O N F I D E N T I A L I T Y N O T I C E : T h i s c o m m u n i c a t i o n i s a t t o r n e y / c l i e n t p r i v i l e g e d a n d c o n f i d e n t i a l a n d

s o l e l y f o r t h e i d e n t i f i e d r e c i p i e n t

. A n y d i s c l o s u r e , c o p y i n g , d i s t r i b u t i o n , o r u s e o f t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h i s c o m m u n i c a t i o n i s s t r i c t l y p r o h i b i t e d

. I f y o u h a v e r e c e i v e d t h i s e
­ m a i l i n e r r o r , i m m e d i a t e l y
n o t i f y t h e s e n d e r b y r e p l y e
­ m a i l a n d p e r m a n e n t l y d e l e t e t h i s t r a n s m i s s i o n

.

T A X A D V I C E D I S C L A I M E R : A n y f e d e r a l t a x a d v i c e c o n t a i n e d i n t h i s c o m m u n i c a t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g
a t t a c h m e n t s ) w a s n o t i n t e n d e d o r w r i t t e n t o b e u s e d
, a n d i t c a n n o t b e u s e d
, b y y o u f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f ( 1 ) a v o i d i n g a n y p e n a l t y t h a t m a y b e i m p o s e d b y t h e I n t e r n a l R e v e n u e S e r v i c e o r ( 2 ) p r o m o t i n g , m a r k e t i n g , o r r e c o m m e n d i n g t o a n o t h e r p a r t y a n y t r a n s a c t i o n o r m a t t e r a d d r e s s e d h e r e i n

.

### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion was served by the Court’s online filing system on this the 2 nd 

### day of July
, 2015 , to:

Dr. J. Hyde, THE J. HYDE LAW OFFICE, PLLC 111 E. 17th Street #12015 Austin. Texas 78711 Phone: (512) 200

- 4080 Fax: (512) 582

- 8295 E

- mail: jhyde@jhydelaw.com

Attorney for Appellee / Real Party in Interest

_/s/ Davi d Rogers

________ _ David Rogers