From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shaw v. Greater Houston Transportation Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston, First District
Jan 26, 1989
764 S.W.2d 390 (Tex. App. 1989)

Opinion

No. 01-88-00784-CV.

January 26, 1989.

Appeal from 334th District Court, Harris County, Marsha Anthony, J.

John F. Vecchio, Houston, for appellants.

Marc A. Sheiness, Houston, for appellees.

Before EVANS, C.J., and DUGGAN and O'CONNOR, JJ.


OPINION


Appellants, Coy C. Shaw and Richard Allen Hall, ask this court to reduce the appeal bond set by the trial court. They claim that the bond of $9,600.00 is excessive. We agree and reduce the amount to $1000.00.

Appellants filed a cash deposit in lieu of bond for $9,600.00 in compliance with the trial court's order. The usual bond required to perfect an appeal is $1000.00, unless the court fixes a different amount. Tex.R.App.P. 46(a). Upon the motion of any party, this Court may increase or decrease the amount of the bond required. Tex.R.App.P. 49(b).

In response to the motion, appellees assert the bond posted is not excessive due to the length of the trial (seven days), and thus, the length of the record. This is not an adequate basis to support a bond of $9,600.00.

Accordingly, appellants' motion to reduce the cost bond is granted. The bond in this cause is reduced to $1,000.00.

It is so ordered.


Summaries of

Shaw v. Greater Houston Transportation Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston, First District
Jan 26, 1989
764 S.W.2d 390 (Tex. App. 1989)
Case details for

Shaw v. Greater Houston Transportation Co.

Case Details

Full title:Coy C. SHAW and Richard Allen Hall, Appellants, v. GREATER HOUSTON…

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston, First District

Date published: Jan 26, 1989

Citations

764 S.W.2d 390 (Tex. App. 1989)

Citing Cases

Tapiador v. N. Amer. Lloyds

The initial $1000 cost bond posted by the Tapiador appellants is inadequate to secure the cost of preparing…