• Subscribe
  • Log In
  • Sign up for email updates
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

The Texas Lawbook

Free Speech, Due Process and Trial by Jury

  • Appellate
  • Bankruptcy
  • Trials & Litigation
    • Business Litigation of the Year
    • Employment
    • Energy/Environmental
    • IP/Patent
    • Mass/Toxic Torts
    • Texas Business Court
  • Corporate Deal Tracker
  • GCs/Corp. Legal Depts.
  • Firm Management
  • White-Collar/Regulatory
  • Pro Bono/Public Service/D&I

Texas Enhances Permissive Appeals by Requiring Explanation for Denials and Expanding Supreme Court Review

September 6, 2023 Todd Smith

With certain statutory exceptions, only final judgments are appealable. Section 51.014(d) of the Civil Practice & Remedies Code provides a remedy by permissive appeal when: (1) a case turns on a controlling question of law; (2) about which a reasonable difference of opinion could exist; and (3) resolution by an appellate court “may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.” The idea is to conclude lawsuits earlier by resolving potentially dispositive but unsettled legal questions, thus sparing the parties significant litigation costs.

Although Texas has allowed permissive appeals for many years, built-in limitations have caused them to be underutilized. For instance, permissive appeals were formerly conditioned on both the trial court’s permission and the opposing party’s agreement to appeal. The latter requirement was removed in 2011 — potentially reducing friction in the process — but the same amendment reinstituted an earlier rule that the appellate court must give its permission to appeal. The net effect was to give already-busy appellate courts discretionary jurisdiction over permissive appeals with little incentive to hear them.

Subscribe or log in to read the rest of this content.

Lost Password?
Log in with Texas Tech School of Law

©2026 The Texas Lawbook.

Content of The Texas Lawbook is controlled and protected by specific licensing agreements with our subscribers and under federal copyright laws. Any distribution of this content without the consent of The Texas Lawbook is prohibited.

If you see any inaccuracy in any article in The Texas Lawbook, please contact us. Our goal is content that is 100% true and accurate. Thank you.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Stories

  • $100M Dispute in Synergy v. Blackbrush Reaches Jury
  • Westlake Chemical Gets Win in East Texas Pipeline Easement Dispute 
  • Premium Q&A with Rachel Donnelly
  • KKR’s Arctos Acquires 7.5% of Atlanta Falcons
  • Affinius Capital’s Rachel Donnelly is the ‘Simone Biles of the Texas Legal Community’

Footer

Who We Are

  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Submit a News Tip

Stay Connected

  • Sign up for email updates
  • Article Submission Guidelines
  • Premium Subscriber Editorial Calendar

Our Partners

  • The Dallas Morning News
The Texas Lawbook logo

1409 Botham Jean Blvd.
Unit 811
Dallas, TX 75215

214.232.6783

© Copyright 2026 The Texas Lawbook
The content on this website is protected under federal Copyright laws. Any use without the consent of The Texas Lawbook is prohibited.