Report: Texas Appellate Courts in 2019 Saw Record Number of Cases
Texas' 14 intermediate appellate courts saw more appeals than ever in 2019, while the Texas Supreme Court saw more petitions for review than it has seen since 2002, according to a new report on the Texas judiciary.
February 05, 2020 at 03:31 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
Texas' 14 intermediate appellate courts saw more appeals than ever in 2019, while the Texas Supreme Court saw more petitions for review than it has seen since 2002, according to a new report on the Texas judiciary.
Those numbers emerged from the most recent Annual Statistical Report for the Texas Judiciary, which covers the state's fiscal year of Sept. 1, 2018, to Aug. 31, 2019.
But despite their increasing workload, the appellate courts are still working efficiently, Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Nathan Hecht said.
"The volume is up, and the supreme court is still clearing its docket of argued cases by the end of June. This year, certainly, we are on track," Hecht said. "The courts of appeals' clearance rate is down a little bit, but I think they will be back up. They work very hard."
Texas Lawyer compiled four factoids from the report for lawyers to review and checked in with Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Nathan Hecht to add context to the data.
1. More bustle
Intermediate appellate courts had their busiest year ever in 2019.
With 5,681 civil appeals filed in 2019, the Lone Star State's 14 courts of appeal handled the highest civil filing numbers in their history, the report said.
When compared to last year, civil appeals increased 2%. When looking at five years, the gain was 8%, said the report.
The 14 intermediate appellate courts issued nearly 9,900 opinions total during the fiscal year. Among them, 63% were original opinions on the merit and 25% were per curiam.
It is hard to know exactly why appeals are increasing, said Hecht.
"I think it's probably just more volume," he said, noting that the trial courts are seeing more litigation, which naturally leads to more appeals.
2. 17% spike
Hecht said the same phenomenon of more trial court cases, and more intermediate appeals, also bumped the number of appeals in the high court.
The 981 petitions for review filed in the Supreme Court represented a 4% increase compared with 2018. There's been a 17% increase when looking at five years of data, said the report.
3. Tidy Docket
Just because more people are filing appeals, doesn't mean the high court is taking all of those cases. The justices in fiscal year 2019 granted only 9% of petitions for review, and 3% of petitions for writ of mandamus, the report said.
Hecht said the Supreme Court still has to review all the cases that come in the door to determine whether to grant review. Staff attorneys and law clerks help with that increased workload, he noted, and technology has also made the busy work more efficient. For example, when Hecht joined the Supreme Court 30 years ago, justices still had to carry around paper copies of petitions for review.
"You had to move them from place to place, turn it page by page," he recalled. "Now, judges are able to access all the petitions in our case management system online. We vote online. It's just a lot more streamlined and efficient than it was years ago."
The impact of that efficiency may be that the court can clear cases from its docket faster than in years past.
The report said in 2019, the court still had 336 pending petitions for review at the end of the year, which is 10% fewer than in 2018. When comparing 2018 and 2019, the Supreme Court's number of regular causes left pending at year's end dropped by 4% and other pending petitions decreased by 6%.
4. What happened?
When the Supreme Court does expect review of an appeal, about half of the time the justices are going to reverse the court of appeals' ruling, the report showed. The statistics show a high level of agreement among the court's nine justices and a low level of disagreement on case outcomes.
Here's a breakdown of the outcomes of Supreme Court appeals:
- Reversed – 50%
- Affirmed – 21%
- Modified – 17%
- Other – 11%
- Dismissed – 1%
Here's a breakdown of the types of opinions the high court issued in 2019:
- Majority – 65%
- Per curiam – 14%
- Concurring – 8%
- Dissenting – 8%
- Concurring & dissenting – 4%
Read the full report:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMoFo Associate Sees a Familiar Face During Her First Appellate Argument: Justice Breyer
Amid the Tragedy of the L.A. Fires, a Lesson on the Value of Good Neighbors
Litigators of the Week: Shortly After Name Partner Kathleen Sullivan’s Retirement, Quinn Emanuel Scores Appellate Win for Vimeo
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250