Legal Opinion

Haney Electric Co. v. Hurst

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided November 25, 1980No. 24421PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROBERTSON, Justice.

This is a motion to require appellants, Haney Electric Company and Marion Willard Stewart, to file additional supersedeas bonds. Appellees obtained a money judgment for $189,000 against appellants who have perfected their appeal and filed a su-persedeas bond for $100,000. Appellees assert that this bond is insufficient. We agree.

Rule 364(a) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure provides that an appellant has the right to suspend the execution of a judgment by giving a good and sufficient bond to be approved by the clerk of the district court in a sum “at least the amount of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Merritt v. J. A. Stafford Co.California Supreme Court · 1968
  2. New v. SmithSupreme Court of Kansas · 1915
  3. Mea v. MeaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1971
  4. Rudolph v. CassidySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1956
  5. Schrader v. GarciaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1974

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Texaco Inc. v. Pennzoil Company, State of Texas, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1986
  2. Beavers v. Beavers, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1983
  3. Yaghoub "Jacob" Kohannim v. Parvaneh Katoli, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2011
  4. Yaghoub "Jacob" Kohannim v. Parvaneh Katoli, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API