I was honored to spend the day at the Texas State Capital on February 27, 2019 for Roofing Day. It was a great experience meeting with those who make our system of government work in Texas and spending time with so many of my hard-working friends in the roofing and restoration community–true professionals passionate about the contributions they make to their communities. I met with various representatives regarding the roofer registration bill proposed by RCAT and NTRCA this legislative session. S.B. No. 1168, submitted by Senator Zaffirini, and H.B. No. 2101, submitted by Representative Capriglione, both propose registration of reroofing contractors as a means of vetting restoration contractors seeking to sell their services following a hail or wind event. Please join us in supporting this consumer-friendly legislation. You can visit https://www.saferoofsovertexas.com/ for more information.
Today marks 7 years Saunders, Walsh & Beard (SWB) has had the honor of representing the people and businesses of Collin County and beyond. We are blessed to be a part of such a great community. SWB is a business litigation law firm in McKinney, Texas, founded in 2012 by long-time friends J. Brantley Saunders and Mark A. Walsh. Alexander N. Beard joined the firm in 2013. As of 2019, we have grown to 16 attorneys and assist individuals and businesses with commercial, business and tort litigation, construction law, corporate and partnership formation and expansion, employment law, insurance disputes, judgment collection, personal jurisdiction, and real estate.
We believe the client’s “experience” is of paramount importance. Our attorneys and staff abide by the golden rule and enjoy a commitment to family, community, and life outside of work.
Explore our practice areas and see why the attorneys of Saunders, Walsh & Beard are ranked by their clients and peers as among the best in their fields.
Cheers to 7 years!
Shelley has not only been an integral part of our firm since we opened the doors in 2012, she has also been the right hand (wo)man to founding partner Brantley Saunders for over 20 years. Her knowledge of the paralegal field, coupled with her steadfast devotion to our clients, attorneys, and firm make her a valuable member of our firm family. She is the inspiration behind our simple principle of doing good work for clients, avoiding drama, and enjoying your family and friends. We are grateful to have her on our team. Congratulations, Shelley!
Mark Walsh founded Saunders, Walsh & Beard with long-time friend, Brantley Saunders, in 2012. Mark is known as a tenacious litigator and negotiator among his peers and clients and a thoughtful and supportive leader among his employees and coworkers. Above all, Mark is a devoted husband and father. We appreciate you, Mark. Happy Birthday!
Mark A. Walsh is a business litigation attorney in McKinney, TX, who has litigated hundreds of construction and business disputes throughout the State of Texas since 1997. He has extensive experience and has counseled clients in all manner of construction and business disputes, commercial contract drafting and litigation, public procurement law, partner/shareholder dispute litigation, and governmental entity representation.
If a party to a lawsuit wants to appeal the trial court’s judgment, it has to post security in the form of a supersedeas bond to suspend enforcement of the judgment during the appeal. In Top Cat Ready Mix, LLC v. Alliance Trucking, LP, et al., the Texas Fifth District Court of Appeals recently addressed the proper calculation of the amount of the supersedeas bond.
Instructions for calculating the amount of the supersedeas bond are set forth in Chapter 52 of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code. Pursuant to the statute, “the amount of the security must equal the sum of: 1) the amount of compensatory damages awarded in the judgment; 2) interest for the estimated duration of the appeal; and 3) costs awarded in the judgment.” Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §52.006(a). Unfortunately, the phrase “compensatory damages” is undefined. In Top Cat Ready Mix, the court was tasked with interpreting the phrase “compensatory damages.”
The issue addressed in Top Cat Ready Mix is whether an award of contractual pre-judgment interest should be included as “compensatory damages” for purposes of calculating the amount of a supersedeas bond under Chapter 52. The trial court’s judgment awarded the plaintiff $315,087.21 in “actual damages,” $198,739.63 in “contractual pre-judgment interest,” $70,000 in attorneys’ fees, and post-judgment interest. The defendant superseded the judgment pending its appeal by posting a cash deposit in the amount of $371,802.90, reflecting the “actual damages” award, but not taking into account the “contractual pre-judgment interest.” The plaintiff filed a Motion to Review Supersedeas Security with the appellate court seeking to increase the amount of the bond to include the “contractual pre-judgment interest.”
In its opinion dated December 27, 2018, the Texas Fifth District Court of Appeals concluded that the phrase “compensatory damages” includes contractual pre-judgment interest. The court turned to the Black’s Law Dictionary, the Texas Finance Code, and the Texas Supreme Court’s opinion in In re Nalle Plastics Family Limited Partnership, 406 S.W.3d 168 (Tex. 2013) to reach its conclusion. While pre-judgment interest is “compensatory,” it is not considered an element of damage. However, in its opinion, the court drew a distinction between pre-judgment interest and contractual interest. “’Contract interest’ means interest that an obligor has promised or agreed to pay to a creditor under a written contract of the parties. The term does not include judgment interest.” Tex. Fin. Code §301.002(a)(1). The court held, “While pre-judgment interest might not be compensatory damages, ‘contractual interest’ is ‘a part of the debt, as much so as the principal.’” (citing First Nat’l Bank v. J.I. Campbell Co., 114 S.W. 887, 890 (Tex. Civ. App. – San Antonio 1908, no writ). Therefore, “contractual interest” is a “compensatory damage” for the purpose of calculating the amount of a supersedeas bond, while statutory “pre-judgment interest” is not.
The court’s opinion in Top Cat Ready Mix, LLC v. Alliance Trucking, LP, et al. provides guidance in both the drafting of judgments and the posting of security for an appeal. When the amount of “pre-judgment interest” to be awarded is based upon the parties’ contract, it should be noted in the judgment as “contractual interest” and not as “pre-judgment interest.” If the award recites the nature of the interest clearly, there should be less argument over the proper security needed to suspend enforcement of a judgment during appeal.
Contact Saunders, Walsh & Beard at 214-919-3555 for help with complex litigation matters by one of our AV-Rated attorneys in McKinney, TX.