Cooper v. Bowser, 16279
| Decision Date | 25 April 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 16279,16279 |
| Parties | Harold N. COOPER, M. D., Appellant, v. A. E. BOWSER et ux., et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appellant, Harold N. Cooper, appeals from a judgment entered against him on January 25, 1979, in the sum of $240,725.30, with interest from the date of judgment.
Appellant timely filed a supersedeas and cost bond in the principal amount of $241,225.20. The bond recited that such sum was equal to "at least the amount of the Judgment, interest and cost." The bond was conditioned "that Appellant shall prosecute his appeal with effect; and in case the Judgment of the Supreme Court or the Court of Civil Appeals shall be against him, he shall perform its Judgment, sentence or decree and pay all such damages as said Court may award against him."
Rule 354(a), Tex.R.Civ.P., requires that the cost bond on appeal shall be in the sum of $500.00, unless a different amount is fixed by the court, and that it shall be conditioned that appellant shall prosecute his appeal with effect and "shall pay all the costs which have accrued in the trial court and the cost of the statement of facts and transcript." In this case, no order to the contrary having been entered, appellant, in order to perfect his appeal, without superseding the judgment, was required to file a bond in the sum of $500.00. In order to suspend execution of the judgment, appellant was required by Rule 364(a) to file a bond "in a sum at least the amount of the judgment, interest and costs . . . ." In this case, it is clear that the bond filed by appellant, in the sum of $241,225.30, is sufficient to cover only the amount of the judgment ($240,725.30) plus $500.00 required in order to perfect the appeal without supersedeas. The supersedeas bond, therefore, is not in an amount which includes at least the amount of the judgment, costs and post judgment interest as required by Rule 364.
It is, of course, impossible for an appellant to determine accurately the amount of post judgment interest which will accrue while he pursues the appellate process. Nevertheless, Rule 364 is clear and unambiguous, and there can be no doubt that the intent is that, pending appeal, the supersedeas bond shall be in an amount sufficient to enable the appellee to collect the amount of the judgment against the appellant and his sureties if such...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
TransAmerican Natural Gas Corp. v. Finkelstein, 04-95-00365-CV
...the surety must provide "security, in addition to the personal liability of the appellant, for the payment of the judgment." Cooper v. Bowser, 583 S.W.2d 805, 807 (Tex.Civ.App.--San Antonio 1979, mot.) (per curiam) (emphasis added); see also Ruiz v. Watkins, 701 S.W.2d 688, 691 (Tex.App.--A......
-
Tex. Standard Oil & Gas v. Frankel Offshore Energy Inc.
...(citing Kennesaw Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Streetman, 644 S.W.2d 915, 917 (Tex.App.-Austin 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Cooper v. Bowser, 583 S.W.2d 805, 807 (Tex.Civ.App.-San Antonio 1979, no writ) (“A supersedeas bond that does not include interest is ‘patently insufficient.’ ”)). H.B.4 at......
-
Pena v. Salinas
...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 I would reform that part of the trial court's judgment reducing the supersedeas bond and re......
-
Fortune v. McElhenney
...the rationale of Rule 364. Kennesaw Life and Accident Insurance Company v. Streetman, 644 S.W.2d 915 Tex.App.--Austin 1983; Cooper v. Bowser, 583 S.W.2d 805 (Tex.Civ.App.1979, no We therefore order each appellant to file a proper supersedeas bond with the amount described as $210,078.00, pl......