Court Opinion

ID: 9771779
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 16:53:04.529639+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:36.517743
License: Public Domain

CADENA, Justice,
dissenting in part.
While I concur with the majority’s disposition of the merits of this case, I would sustain appellee’s crosspoint complaining of the trial court’s reduction of the superse-deas bond from $50,000 to $35,000.
TEX.R.CIV.P. 364(b) specifies that:
When the judgment awards recovery of a sum of money, the amount of the bond or deposit shall be at least the amount of the judgment, interest and costs.
Even ignoring the attorney’s fee award for an appeal to the Supreme Court, the judgment against appellant, at present, is for $36,000 plus 10% interest, which is significantly more than the $35,000 supersedeas bond required by the court. The intent of Rule 364(b) is to insure that, “pending the appeal the supersedeas bond shall always be in an amount and with sufficient sureties to enable the appellee to collect the judgment against the appellant and his sureties if it is affirmed.” Cooper v. Bowser, 583 S.W.2d 805, 807 (Tex.Civ.App.—San Antonio 1979, no writ).
I would reform that part of the trial court’s judgment reducing the supersedeas bond and require appellant to post a supersedeas bond in the full amount of the judgment.