In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
_________________
NO. 09-18-00385-CV
_________________
GEORGE EARL DANNER, Appellant
V.
KATHRYN M. DANNER, Appellee
________________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 418th District Court
Montgomery County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 17-03-04143-CV
________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
On December 14, 2018, Appellant, George Earl Danner, filed a net worth
affidavit and a supersedeas bond in the amount of $443,000.00. The trial court
reviewed the net worth affidavit in an evidentiary hearing. See Tex. R. App. P.
24.2(c)(3). On January 10, 2019, the trial court signed an order that denied
Appellant’s motion to reduce the amount of the bond, found that the evidence
presented by Appellant “not to be credible and, therefore, to be insufficient to justify
1
a reduction in the amount of the bond that he stipulated and agreed to on October
31, 2018.” On January 27, 2019, Appellant filed a motion to review the trial court’s
order of January 10, 2019. Appellant asks this Court to stay execution on the
judgment pending our resolution of his motion.
When a judgment debtor provides a bond in an amount based on his net worth,
the judgment creditor may contest the debtor’s claimed net worth. See Tex. R. App.
P. 24.2(c)(1), (2). The judgment debtor has the burden of proving his net worth. See
Tex. R. App. P. 24.2(c)(3). “The trial court must issue an order that states the
debtor’s net worth and states with particularity the factual basis for that
determination.” Id. The trial court must make factual findings of the judgment
debtor’s net worth and must make findings that will permit a reviewing court to
ascertain the basis for the trial court’s determination of the judgment debtor’s net
worth. In re Smith, 192 S.W.3d 564, 568 (Tex. 2006). In this case, the trial court
made findings regarding the appropriate security based upon the amount of the
judgment, but failed to make factual findings of the judgment debtor’s net worth and
the factual determination of the judgment debtor’s net worth. The trial court’s failure
to make the required findings prevents this Court from properly reviewing the trial
court’s order. See id.; see also Tex. R. App. P. 44.4.
2
Accordingly, on the Court’s own motion, the appeal is abated and the case is
remanded to the trial court for entry of the findings of fact that are required for a
determination of new worth. See Tex. R. App. P. 24.2(c)(3); see also Tex. R. App.
P. 44.4. A supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s findings must be
filed with the Court of Appeals by February 21, 2019. Execution on the judgment is
stayed pending further order of this Court. See Tex. R. App. P. 24.4(c). Appellant’s
motion to review and reduce the supersedeas bond remains pending before the Court.
ORDER ENTERED February 1, 2019.
PER CURIAM
Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
3