§ 102.005.Security for Court Costs Not Required

One sentence extending the government’s own bond exemption to the person it is defending.

In a case defended under this chapter, neither the defendant nor a local government is required to advance security for costs or to give bond on appeal or writ of error.

The local government’s exemption exists elsewhere already — cities and school districts are excused from security for costs and from supersedeas and cost bonds by their own provisions.

What this adds is the defendant. The employee being defended gets the same exemption, which they would not otherwise have.

The reason is that the two are practically one party. The government is paying for the defence and will pay the damages within the caps, so requiring the individual to post security would be requiring security from someone with no stake in the money.

It also removes a route by which the protection could fail. An employee unable to post an appeal bond would lose the appeal for want of money, whatever the government’s willingness to defend.

The exemption is conditional on the case being defended under this chapter, so an employee defending at their own expense is outside it.

Both securities are covered: advancing security for costs at the trial level, and bond on appeal or writ of error.

The state indemnification chapter carries an identical provision for cases the attorney general defends, so the two regimes match on this point.