Superseding at Half Net Worth Requires “Complete, Detailed Information”

Abel v. Texas Capital Bancshares, Inc.
Dallas Court of Appeals, No. 05-25-00932-CV (August 26, 2026)
Justices Goldstein (Opinion linked here), Garcia, and Lee

Ken Carroll

To supersede a money judgment, one normally must post a bond or cash in an amount equal to the sum of (1) compensatory damages and costs awarded in the judgment and (2) interest for the estimated duration of the appeal. TCPRC § 52.006(a). But if that amount exceeds half the judgment debtor’s net worth as determined by generally accepted accounting principles, he or she may supersede by posting a bond or making a deposit in the amount of half his or her net worth, provided the judgment debtor also files an affidavit that “states complete, detailed information concerning the debtor’s assets and liabilities from which net worth can be ascertained.” Tex. R. App. P. 24.2(c)(1).

Facing a $7 million judgment, Abel tried to avail herself of the half-your-net-worth alternative to supersede. But the trial court and the Dallas Court of Appeals ruled the affidavit she filed in support did not provide sufficiently “complete, detailed information.” Here is what her affidavit stated:

The Court of Appeals explained that, “‘Complete, detailed information,’ for purpose of the rule, is sufficient information, or supporting documentation, from which the assigned values of the assets and liabilities in the affidavit can be verified.” Here, although Abel provided amounts for various categories of assets and liabilities, she attached no supporting documents and provided no information from which those amounts could “be verified.” For example, she didn’t specify what the “cash equivalents” and “accrued receivables” were or include the year, make, and model of the truck or trailer; nor did she break down what was included in “accrued liability.” Because the her affidavit was insufficient under the statute, Abel was not entitled to supersede based on half of her purported net worth.