A. Failure to Post Supersedeas Bond
Marshall argues that her failure to post a supersedeas bond pursuant to Texas Property Code Section 24.007 does not prevent her from appealing the trial court’s judgment. Her argument anticipates the Housing Authority’s position that Marshall’s appeal must be dismissed because a supersedeas bond is required to perfect an appeal. See Reyes v. R.C. Mgmt., Inc., No. 04-01-00405-CV, 2001 WL 1479256, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio, Nov. 21, 2001, pet. denied) (not designated for publication). We agree with Marshall.
The Texas Property Code provides that judgment in a forcible detainer action may not be stayed pending appeal unless the appellant timely files a supersedeas bond in the amount set by the trial court. Tex. Prop. Code § 24.007. Thus, if a proper supersedeas bond is not filed, the judgment may be enforced, including issuance of a writ of possession evicting the tenant from the premises. However, there is no language in the statute which purports to either impair the appellate rights of a tenant or require a bond be posted to perfect an appeal. See id. Marshall’s failure to supersede the judgment did not divest her of her right to appeal. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 621, 627; Tex. R. App. P. 24, 25.
7 comments:
Tx Sp CT: "Marshall’s failure to supersede the judgment did not divest her of her right to appeal."
jk: but it will divest some of our appellate rights mainly creating it moot.
what was moot was that she moved out and there fore pre-empted the humiliation of bexar county sheriffs office from physically removing her and her childrens property.
The court of appeals reasoned that because Marshall had relinquished possession of the apartment, the court could no longer grant effectual relief. ___ S.W.3d ___.
The Texas Supreme Court Concurred
Above is why the court must stay the writ to stay the execution of the judgement.
1. The only argument listed in the original complaint “the tenant refused to sign lease”.
2. Original complaint makes no argument of holdover lease.
3. Original complaint cites the reason for signing a 60 day lease was to increase the rent.
4. In the ignorance and disregard of the JP Courtroom I was termed a hold over tenant by the JustUs of the Peace, now Harper makes the leap from increase in rent reasoning to a holdover tenant reasoning for signing a lease in violation of the HAP contract and lease addendum
5. Tenant under
6. Tenant refused to sign the lease “on demand”?
7. Dean’s Affidavit
8. Signing a new lease would violate HAP agreement & Lease Addendum
9. Harper’s Trial Court that there is no lease in place but there is a HAP contract and a lease addendum per CFR
10. Prove Lease exists
11. Prove new owner has to accept lease or follow due process per CFR.
12. Prove violations of due process
I was attempting to find a reputable surety bond company who could help me with some court bonds to assist my family. One of my sons has gotten into some trouble and I only want the best and trustworthy representatives for him. I did some research and ended up using a company a friend recommended, they also had some past examples on their website which helped to show success.
Can you tell me what Surety Bonds are? I have heard of Corporate Surety Bonds but I don’t understand what they are, can you help?
Post a Comment