Bindinglaw

TX · rules

Tex. R. App. P. 41.3

Precedent in Transferred Cases

activein force · 2026-02-06 – presentact-effective-date

In cases transferred by the Supreme Court from

one court of appeals to another, the court of appeals to

which the case is transferred must decide the case in

accordance with the precedent of the transferor court

under principles of stare decisis if the transferee court's

decision otherwise would have been inconsistent with

the precedent of the transferor court. The court's

opinion may state whether the outcome would have

been different had the transferee court not been

required to decide the case in accor dance with the

transferor court's precedent.

History

Notes and Comments Comment to 1997 change: This is former Rule 79. The rule is reorganized. Paragraphs 41.1(b) and (c) are amended to make clear that a three judge panel must hear the case. Therefore, only if a member of a panel is lost after argument do the provisions for appointment of another justice to break a deadlock come into play. Paragraph 41.2(a) is amended to define an en banc court. Comment to 2008 change: Subdivisions 41.1 and 41.2 are amended to acknowledge the full authority of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to temporarily assign a justice or judge to hear a matter pending in an appellate court. The statutory provisions governing the assignment of judges to appellate courts are located in Chapters 74 and 75 of the Government Code. Other minor changes are made for consistency. Subdivision 41.3 is added to require, in appellate cases transferred by the Supreme Court under Se ction 73.001 of the Government Code for docket equalization or other purposes, that the transferee court must generally resolve any conflict between the precedent of the transferor court and the precedent of the transferee court — or that of any other intermediate appellate court the transferee court otherwise would have followed — by following the precedent of the transferor court, unless it appears that the transferor court itself would not be bound by that precedent. The rule requires the transferee cou rt to “stand in the shoes” of the transferor court so that an appellate transfer will not produce a different outcome, based on application of substantive law, than would have resulted had the case not been transferred. The transferee court is not expected to follow the transferor court’s local rules or otherwise supplant its own local procedures with those of the transferor court.

Provenance

Source
txcourts.gov
Retrieved
2026-09-15
Edition
2026-09-14
Content hash
c1f308083ff99aa761a83a9df154dc761617234e7b99dec736a38d71301b6e63
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.
Tex. R. App. P. 41.3 — Precedent in Transferred Cases · binding.law