in Re Harley Channelview Properties, LLC

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 18, 2021
• Docket: 01-21-00548-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: In re Harley Channelview Properties, LLC

Appellate case number: 01-21-00548-CV

Trial court case number: 2020-67063

Trial court: 80th District Court of Harris County

On October 12, 2021, relator, Harley Channelview Properties, LLC (“Channelview”), filed a petition for writ of mandamus and an emergency motion for temporary relief to stay the trial court’s September 20, 2021 interlocutory order. Real party in interest, Harley Marine Gulf (“HMG”), responded to the emergency motion, contending that Channelview failed to meet its burden to obtain temporary relief, and alternatively, if this Court were to stay the trial court’s order, we should require a bond. HMG states that “[t]he “bond should cover the monthly rental value of the property and offset the excess rent that HMG has been paying to Channelview each month.” In sum, HMG requests a bond in the amount of $2,835,252. Channelview replied, stating that “[i]t is HMG that should post a bond” but did not otherwise object to relator’s bond amount. Accordingly, we grant Channelview’s motion to stay the September 20, 2021 interlocutory order which, among other things, directs Channelview to convey title to the subject property to HMG. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.10(b). As a condition of granting temporary relief, this Court requires Channelview to file a good and sufficient bond in compliance with the applicable procedures delineated in Rule 24 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Id. 24, 24.1(a)(2), 24.2(a)(2), 52.10(b). Within 30 days, Channelview must inform this Court whether it has complied with this order. This stay is effective until the case in this Court is finally decided, the Court otherwise orders the stay lifted, or Channelview does not comply with filing a bond in compliance with Rule 24 within 30 days. Any party may file a motion for reconsideration of the stay. See id. 52.10(c). Further, the Court requests that HMG respond to the petition for writ of mandamus. It is ordered that the response of any interested party, if any, shall be due no later than 20 days from the date of this order. It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Sherry Radack  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: ___October 18, 2021____