Rule 24.4 - Appellate Review(a)Motions; Review. A party may seek review of the trial court's ruling by motion filed in the court of appeals with jurisdiction or potential jurisdiction over the appeal from the judgment in the case. A party may seek review of the court of appeals' ruling on the motion by petition for writ of mandamus in the Supreme Court. The appellate court may review: (1) the sufficiency or excessiveness of the amount of security, but when the judgment is for money, the appellate court must not modify the amount of security to exceed the limits imposed by Rule 24.2(a)(1);(2) the sureties on any bond;(3) the type of security;(4) the determination whether to permit suspension of enforcement; and(5) the trial court's exercise of discretion under Rule 24.3(a).(b)Grounds of Review. Review may be based both on conditions as they existed at the time the trial court signed an order and on changes in those conditions afterward.(c)Temporary Orders. The appellate court may issue any temporary orders necessary to preserve the parties' rights.(d)Action by Appellate Court. The motion must be heard at the earliest practicable time. The appellate court may require that the amount of a bond, deposit, or other security be increased or decreased, and that another bond, deposit, or security be provided. The appellate court may require other changes in the trial court order. The appellate court may remand to the trial court for entry of findings of fact or for the taking of evidence.(e)Effect of Ruling. If the appellate court orders additional or other security to supersede the judgment, enforcement will be suspended for 20 days after the appellate court's order. If the judgment debtor does not comply with the order within that period, the judgment may be enforced. When any additional bond, deposit, or security has been filed, the trial court clerk must notify the appellate court. The posting of additional security will not release the previously posted security or affect any alternative security arrangements that the judgment debtor previously made unless specifically ordered by the appellate court.Amended effective 1/1/2024.Notes and Comments
Comment to 1997 change: Former Rules 47, 48, and 49 are merged. The rule is substantially revised. Paragraph 24.1(a) now provides for superseding the judgment by agreement. Paragraph 24.1(c) is taken from former Rule 48 and provides for a deposit in lieu of the bond, including specific provisions for the release of the deposit. Paragraph 24.1(d) provides the conditions for the surety to honor the bond and for the deposit to be paid to the judgment creditor. In subdivision 24.2, the provisions for determining the amount of the bond or deposit are simplified. All provisions regarding superseding a judgment for an interest in property are merged into subparagraph 24.2(a)(2). The procedure for allowing security in a lesser amount is moved to paragraph 24.2(b) and is made applicable to all judgments. Subdivision 24.4 is taken from former Rule 49. The procedure for appellate review is more precisely stated.
Comment to 2008 change: Subdivision 24.2(c) is amended to clarify the procedure in determining net worth. A debtor's affidavit of net worth must be detailed, but the clerk must file what is tendered without determining whether it complies with the rule. If the trial court orders that additional or other security be given, the debtor is afforded time to comply. Subdivision 24.4(a) is revised to clarify that a party seeking relief from a supersedeas ruling should file a motion in the court of appeals that has or presumably will have jurisdiction of the appeal. After the court of appeals has ruled, a party may seek review by filing a petition for writ of mandamus in the Supreme Court. See In re Smith / In re Main Place Custom Homes, Inc., 192 S.W.3d 564, 568 (Tex. 2006) (per curiam).
Comment to 2023 change: New Rule 24.2(e) and (f) are added to implement section 52.007 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
Comment to 2024 change: Rules 24.1(b)(2) and 24.4(d) are amended to provide that a bond is effective upon filing, though the bond is still subject to challenge.