§ 125.003.Suit on Bond

Enforcement after an order is broken, plus the chapter’s expedited timetable.

Where a condition of a bond or an injunctive order is violated, the district, county, or city attorney or the attorney general shall sue on the bond in the name of the state.

The verb is "shall", so this is a duty rather than an option.

The whole sum is forfeited as a penalty — to the state where the attorney general originates the suit, and to the originating entity where any other office does.

Directing the forfeiture to the office that brought the case is a deliberate incentive, and in the largest municipalities it feeds the nuisance abatement fund the chapter separately creates.

On forfeiture, the place shall be ordered closed for one year from the date of the forfeiture order. That is the same closure the original judgment carries, running again from the breach.

The party bringing the suit may recover reasonable expenses, including investigative costs, court costs, reasonable attorney’s fees, witness fees, and deposition fees.

Subsection (c) is the timetable, and it is unusually tight. A person may not continue the enjoined activity pending appeal or trial on the merits; a court of appeals shall hear and decide an appeal within 90 days of the injunctive order; and where no appeal is taken, the parties are entitled to a full trial on the merits within 90 days of the temporary order.

The first clause is the significant one. An injunction under this chapter is not suspended by appealing it, so a place stays closed while the appeal is heard — which is why the 90-day deadlines exist.

Subsection (e) preserves one exemption: nothing allows an abatement suit against any enterprise whose sole business is that of a bookstore or movie theater.

That carve-out answers a First Amendment concern about closing a business that sells or shows expression, and it is confined to enterprises whose sole business is that.