TX · rules
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2
Designation and Signing of Opinions; Participating Justices
(a) Civil and Criminal Cases. Each opinion of
the court must be designated either an
“Opinion” or a “Memorandum Opinion.” A
majority of the justices who participate in
considering the case must determine whether
the opinion will be signed by a justice or will
be per curiam and whether it will be
designated an opinion or memorandum
opinion. The names of the participating
justices must be noted on all written opinions
or orders of the court or a panel of the court.
(b) Criminal Cases. In addition, each opinion
and memorandum opinion in a criminal case
must bear the notation “publish” or “do not
publish” as determined — before the opinion
is handed down — by a majority of the
justices who participate in considering the
case. Any party may move the appellate
court to change the notation, but the court of
appeals must not change the notation after the
Court of Criminal Appeals has acted on any
party's petition for discretionary review or
other request for relief. The Court of
Criminal Appeals may, at any time, order that
a “do not publish” notation be changed to
“publish.”
(c) Civil Cases. Opinions and memorandum
opinions in civil cases issued on or after
January 1, 2003 shall not be designated “do
not publish.”
History
Notes and Comments Comment to 1997 change: This is former Rule 90. Subdivision 47.1 makes clear that a memorandum opinion should not be any longer than necessary. Subdivision 47.5 is amended to make clear that only justices who participated in the decision may file an opinion in the case. Judges who are not on a panel may file an opinion only in respect to a hearing or rehearing en banc. Former Rule 90(h), regarding publication of opinions after the Supreme Court grants review, is repealed. Comment to 2002 change: The rule is substantively changed to discontinue the use of the “do not publish” designation in civil cases, to require that all opinions of the court of appeals be made available to public reporting services, and to remove prospectively any prohibition against the citation of opinions as authority in civil cases. The rule favors the use of “memorandum opinions” designated as such except in certain types of cases but does not change other requirements, such as those in Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 635-636 (Tex. 1986). An opinion previously designated “do not publish” has no precedential value but may be cited. The citation must include the notation, “(not designated for publication).” Of course, whenever an opinion not readily available is cited, copies should be furnished to the court and opposing counsel. Comment to 2008 change: Effective January 1, 2003, Rule 47 was amended to prospectively discontinue designating opinions in civil cases as either “published” or “unpublished.” Subdivision 47.7 is revised to clarify that, with respect to civil cases, only opinions issued prior to the 2003 amendment and affirmatively designated “ do not publish” should be considered “unpublished” cases lacking precedential value. All opinions and memorandum opinions in civil cases issued after the 2003 amendment have precedential value. The provisions governing citation of unpublished opinions in criminal cases are substantively unchanged. Subdivisions 47.2 and 47.7 are amended to clarify that memorandum opinions are subject to those rules.
Provenance
- Source
- txcourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-15
- Edition
- 2026-09-14
- Content hash
6e1f199f1864814fcbad545f80711d7dfff51fc9942c04e8f1b2ade2738172de
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.