Anthony Moore and Joann Moore v. David Subia
04-16-00786-CV
Tex. App.—WacoJan 27, 2017Background
- Appellants Anthony and Joann Moore occupied a property; appellee David Subia sued them in justice court for forcible entry and detainer and prevailed.
- After appeals, County Court at Law No. 3 entered a Judgment for Forcible Eviction and Detainer awarding Subia $5,591 in attorney’s fees and ordering a writ of possession; the trial court set a supersedeas bond at $15,000.
- The Moores filed a notice of appeal and an emergency motion asking this court to review the $15,000 supersedeas bond as excessive, noting monthly rent of $200.
- The Fourth Court of Appeals stayed the judgment pending appeal of the bond amount and requested supplemental clerk’s and reporter’s records regarding the bond hearing.
- The reporter’s record from the bond hearing showed no evidence was introduced; Subia’s attorney made arguments about market value ($25,000–$30,000) and a potential sale, but no testimony or documentary evidence supported a pending sale or amount of lost sale proceeds.
- The appellate court concluded there was no evidentiary support for the $15,000 bond and remanded for an evidentiary hearing, ordering the trial court to set bond based on the evidence within 30 days and to file supplemental records.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the $15,000 supersedeas bond was appropriate | Subia: potential loss of sale/market-value harm justifies large bond | Moores: bond excessive given $200/month rent and no evidence of additional damages | No evidence supported $15,000; remand for evidentiary hearing to set bond per evidence |
| Whether the trial court relied on admissible evidence when setting bond | Subia: counsel’s statements and market-value assertions show harm | Moores: counsel argument is insufficient without evidence | Held that no evidence was presented; attorney argument alone is not enough; take evidence on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- McCartney v. California Mortgage Service, 951 S.W.2d 549 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1997) (potential loss of sale may be considered in setting supersedeas bond)
- Miller v. Kennedy & Minshew, P.C., 80 S.W.3d 161 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2002) (trial court has broad discretion in setting appeal security; reviewed for abuse of discretion)