Miller v. Kennedy & Minshew, Professional Corp.

OPINION

SUE WALKER, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION.

Appellant William J. Miller (“Miller”) seeks our review of the trial court’s order holding his supersedeas bond insufficient. See Tex.R.App. P. 24.4. In two issues, Miller contends that the trial court erred by finding the supersedeas bond insufficient because there is no “basis in law or fact to reach such conclusion” and the trial court does not have “unbridled authority to determine and order the amount and the type of security and the sufficiency of sureties.” 1 We hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion. We remand the supersedeas…