Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014

Section 51.014(a) does not authorize an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a summary-judgment motion like McBride’s breach-of-contract motion.

Kirk Wayne McBride, Sr. v. Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles David Gutierrez, Chair of the Texas Board of Pardons and P · filed 2019-08-22(a)

Although the legislature has authorized appellate review of certain interlocutory rulings by trial courts, including certain types of orders denying summary judgment, see Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(a), the legislature has not authorized an interlocutory appeal for summary-judgment rulings like the one at issue in this case.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from the denial of summary judgment on jurisdictional grounds even when the trial court did not expressly rule on a plea to the jurisdiction raising the same grounds.

Ector County and Ector County Sheriff's Office v. Grace · filed 2023-02-21(a)(8)

Thus, although the trial court did not expressly rule on Appellants’ plea to the jurisdiction, we nonetheless retain jurisdiction to review the trial court’s denial of summary judgment on the basis by which Appellants challenged the trial court’s subject-matter jurisdiction.

Section 51.014 allows interlocutory appeals from orders denying summary judgment only in specified circumstances.

Chandler v. Hiscox, Inc. · filed 2023-09-28(a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(17)

Although Section 51.014 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code authorizes appeals from interlocutory orders denying summary judgment in certain, limited circumstances, none of those circumstances is present here.

Section 51.014 does not permit an immediate appeal from an order denying summary judgment in an appeal from a civil service commission decision.

City of Pharr v. Guerra · filed 2026-02-12

Our limited interlocutory jurisdiction is conferred by statute, and although the list of appealable interlocutory orders continues to grow, there is nothing in § 51.014 (the most common source of our interlocutory jurisdiction) that entitles the City to immediate review of an order denying summary judgment on an appeal from a civil service commission decision.

Section 51.014(a)(6) permits a media defendant to appeal an interlocutory order denying a summary judgment motion that raises a free speech defense.

Mayfield v. John Cuoco, Steve Fulljart, KBTX News, a Corporation and Gray Communications, a Corporation, Jointly a · filed 2013-04-09(a)(6)

A media defendant may appeal an interlocutory order denying a motion for summary judgment raising a free speech defense. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(a)(6). In this case, the media defendants’ motion for summary judgment was granted.

Section 51.014(b)'s automatic stay does not take effect when an appeal under subsection (a)(8) is premature because the trial court has not ruled on the plea to the jurisdiction.

In Re City of Houston v. the State of Texas · filed 2024-03-15(b)

The trial court has not ruled on the plea to jurisdiction. Thus, the notice of interlocutory appeal is premature, and the automatic stay is not in effect.

Section 51.014(b) does not provide an automatic stay during an interlocutory appeal from an order denying a motion to compel arbitration.

Texas REIT, LLC, Ali Choudhri, Dalio Holdings I, LLC and Dalio Holdings II, LLC v. Mokaram-Latif West Loop, LTD and Ali · filed 2023-10-17(b)

Texas law does, however, provide for some automatic stays during certain interlocutory appeal. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(b) (providing for automatic stays of certain statutorily allowed interlocutory appeals). An interlocutory appeal from the denial of a motion to compel arbitration is not an appeal for which our Civil Practice and Remedies Code provides an automatic stay.

Section 51.014(b)'s automatic stay terminates when the interlocutory appeal is dismissed.

F. Douglas Montague III and Montague Pittman & Varnado, P.A. v. Pohl · filed 2023-02-09(b)

Although the motion also requests that we lift the automatic stay imposed under Section 51.014(b) of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code, we need not order the stay lifted because it necessarily terminates upon dismissal of the appeal.

Section 51.014(b)’s automatic stay of trial-court proceedings ends when the appellate court issues its opinion and mandate.

in Re Public Utility Commission of Texas Peter Lake, Chariman Will McAdams, Commissioner Lori Cobos, Commissioner And Ji · filed 2022-10-27(b)

This Court has issued an opinion and mandate in the underlying matter, 03-21-00597- CV, and therefore the automatic stay in the underlying proceeding has been lifted.

An appeal under subsection (a)(12) automatically stays trial court proceedings under subsection (b), requiring an order entered during the stay to be vacated.

Patriot Contracting, LLC and Stephen J. Friedman v. Mid-Main Properties, LP · filed 2022-04-28(a)(12), (b)

We vacated that order because the trial court signed it during the automatic stay of all trial court proceedings. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(a)(12), (b).

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays trial court proceedings when an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a section 27.003 motion is filed, until the appeal is finally disposed.

Jeremy Sampson and Kevin Hubbard v. Hill-Wald, LLC D/B/A Willowbrook Sports Complex, Tracy Wald, and Jeffrey Hill · filed 2022-05-26(b)

Accordingly, we order the trial court to enforce the statutory stay mandated by section 51.014(b) and stay the hearing set for May 31, 2022 until this appeal is finally disposed.

Section 51.014(b) allows trial proceedings to continue while an appeal from an order granting a motion to dissolve a temporary injunction is pending.

Bitgood v. Stephen S. Harkness and Anna M. Harkness · filed 2022-04-21(b)

By statute, an appeal of an order granting a motion to dissolve a temporary injunction does not stay the commencement of the trial or other proceedings pending the resolution of the appeal. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(b).

Section 51.014(c)(1) allows an interlocutory appeal to trigger the automatic stay when the jurisdictional plea is filed and a hearing requested by the scheduling-order deadline, even if the hearing occurs later.

in Re Town of Shady Shores · filed 2016-08-18(c)(1)

Even though the motions were not heard until October 21, the motions were filed and a hearing was requested prior to October 1. Thus, the automatic stay was triggered when the Town filed its notice of interlocutory appeal on November 9.

Section 51.014(c)’s 180-day period for obtaining an automatic stay excludes time the case spent in federal court after removal.

in Re University of the Incarnate Word · filed 2015-06-24(c)

Because UIW’s plea to the jurisdiction was filed, heard, and determined by the trial court within the 180-day time period required by section 51.014(c) when the removal period is not considered, we conclude UIW is entitled to the automatic stay while its interlocutory appeal from the denial of its plea to the jurisdiction is pending.

An interlocutory appeal authorized by Section 51.014(a)(5) or (8) automatically stays trial court proceedings.

Draper v. Greg Guernsey, in His Capacity as Director of Planning and Development Watershed Protection Review · filed 2015-02-25(b)

Under either statutory ground, furthermore, Draper’s appeal automatically stayed proceedings in the trial court, see Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(b), providing him the relief he has requested through a separate motion for stay. Accordingly, we dismiss Draper’s stay motion as moot.

Section 51.014(b) prevents a trial on the merits while an interlocutory appeal is pending.

Texas Department of Criminal Justice v. Arthur Cooke, Ernest Cortez, Larry Johnson, and Dequinna Moore · filed 2004-05-20(b)

Because this is an interlocutory appeal, the plaintiffs may not proceed to a trial on the merits during the pendency of this appeal.

An interlocutory appeal from an order granting a plea to the jurisdiction stays all trial court proceedings pending resolution of the appeal.

Garrison v. City of Leon Valley · filed 2005-03-09(b)

While the granting of a plea to the jurisdiction is appealable by interlocutory order, see Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(a)(8) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05), such an interlocutory appeal would stay all proceedings in the trial court pending resolution of the appeal, see id. § 51.014(b).

A party waives the stay under Section 51.014(b) by failing to timely inform the trial court that it applies.

Henry v. Flintrock Feeders, Inc. · filed 2005-06-01(b)

We conclude that any error the trial court committed by not staying the commencement of the pending resolution of the present interlocutory appeal was waived by the failure of Henry to timely inform the trial court of the application of the stay provision of section 51.014(b).

Section 51.014(c) provides an automatic stay of trial during an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a special appearance when the defendant meets its filing and hearing deadlines.

Morrill v. Lawrence J. Cisek, Jr. · filed 2005-08-31(c)

Therefore, pursuant to section 51.014(c) of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code, Morrill was entitled to the automatic stay in order to pursue her interlocutory appeal after the trial court denied her special appearance.

Section 51.014(b) stays the commencement of trial as soon as an interlocutory appeal under subsection (a)(9) is taken, without a separate court order.

Clark Watts, M.D. v. Roger Renee Rodriguez and Dorothy Rodriguez · filed 2006-03-24(b)

The statutory stay becomes effective as soon as the interlocutory appeal is taken, therefore, temporary orders by this Court staying the commencement of trial are unnecessary.

A governmental unit’s interlocutory appeal from an order denying a plea to the jurisdiction automatically stays the start of trial until the appeal is resolved.

in Re Texas Department of Human Services · filed 2007-03-19(b)

However, because the matter may arise again, we note in dismissing the petition as moot that, under the law applicable to this case, a governmental unit's interlocutory appeal of an order denying a plea to the jurisdiction automatically "stay[s] the commencement of a trial in the trial court pending resolution of the appeal."

Section 51.014(b) stays trial court proceedings during an interlocutory appeal and prevents the trial court from granting additional relief.

CITY OF McALLEN, TEXAS v. McALLEN POLICE OFFICERS UNION AND MICHAEL ZELLERS, PRESIDENT · filed 2007-04-13(b)

At the present time, the trial court is stayed from all proceedings under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 51.014. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(b) (Vernon Supp. 2006). The stay has precluded the trial court from providing any additional remedy of any nature prior to the election, including a ruling on Plaintiffs' Emergency Request for Declaratory Relief, Writ of Mandamus, and Attorneys Fees, which was filed on April 4, 2007.

Section 51.014(b) stays trial court proceedings during a covered interlocutory appeal, preventing a party from amending its petition to moot the appeal.

the City of Houston v. Swinerton Builders, Inc. · filed 2007-06-21(b)

We conclude that section 51.014 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code prevents Swinerton from amending its petition below, and therefore deny Swinerton's motion to dismiss the City's appeal.

Section 51.014(b)’s stay of trial pending an interlocutory appeal does not apply when severance makes the appealed order final.

Motor Coach Industries, Inc. v. Marcopolo · filed 2007-11-21(b)

This is not an interlocutory appeal, it is the appeal of a final order. After granting Marcopolo’s special appearance and dismissing the claims against Marcopolo, the trial court severed Motor Coach’s claims against Marcopolo. The interlocutory-appeal statute does not govern Motor Coach’s appeal.

Section 51.014 generally allows trial court proceedings to continue during an interlocutory appeal, subject to specified exceptions.

Phillip Jackson and Mary Jackson v. Mayor Samuel Loyd Neal and District Attorney Carlos Valdez · filed 2009-01-22

An appeal from an interlocutory order does not stay the commencement of a trial or other proceedings in the trial court, except in limited circumstances. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014 (Vernon 2008). None of the specific circumstances apply in this case. See id.

Section 51.014(d) permits a trial court to authorize an otherwise unavailable interlocutory appeal when specified conditions occur.

Hickman-Bey v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Institutional Division · filed 2009-07-22(d)

A trial court may order an interlocutory appeal in a civil action not otherwise available for interlocutory appeal on the occurrence of specified conditions. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(d) (Vernon 2008). Those conditions have not occurred here.

Section 51.014(d) permits a trial court to authorize an otherwise unavailable interlocutory appeal when specified conditions occur.

Garcia v. Dickens County, City of Spur, Spur Independent School District in Their Official Capacity · filed 2011-01-21(d)

A trial court may order an interlocutory appeal in a civil action not otherwise available for interlocutory appeal on the occurrence of specified conditions. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(d) (West 2008). Those conditions have not occurred here.

A party may waive complaints about trial court actions taken during the stay imposed by section 51.014(b).

Roccaforte v. Jefferson County · filed 2011-04-29(b)

We agree with those decisions that have held that a party may waive complaints about a trial court's actions in violation of the stay imposed by section 51.014(b).

Section 51.014(b) provides an automatic stay of trial court proceedings during an interlocutory appeal; the appellate court may deny a motion to lift it.

Jessie F. McMaster, Jr. v. Public Utility Commission of Texas · filed 2011-10-05(b)

We grant Lone Star's motion to intervene and deny the emergency motion to lift the automatic stay of trial court proceedings.

Section 51.014 permits an automatic stay during an interlocutory appeal from denial of a plea to the jurisdiction when the plea and hearing request meet its deadline; for a newly pleaded cause of action, the period is 180 days from the defendant’s responsive pleading.

City of Cibolo, Texas (The "City") v. Koehler · filed 2011-11-23

Accordingly, both pleas were filed and hearings were requested on both pleas within the 180 days allowed by section 51.014; therefore, the City complied with the statutory deadline relating to the automatic stay.

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays trial court proceedings during an interlocutory appeal, and the appellate court may lift that stay for a limited purpose.

Henry L. Zumwalt and H.L. Zumwalt Construction, Inc. // the City of San Antonio, Acting by and Through Its… · filed 2011-11-29(b)

Trial court proceedings were automatically stayed. See id. § 51.014(b). ... We grant the joint motion to lift the stay of trial court proceedings for the limited purpose of allowing the trial court to enter an agreed final judgment and sever the settling parties from the underlying suit.

Section 51.014(b) permits a stay of trial court proceedings pending an interlocutory appeal under subsection (a)(3).

Bliss & Glennon Inc. v. Eugene Lyle Ashley and Ashley General Agency, LLC · filed 2013-04-08(b)

Appellant’s motion to stay the underlying proceedings in the above-referenced trial court case pending the outcome of the interlocutory appeal is granted. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)(3), (b) (West Supp. 2012).

Section 51.014(b)’s automatic stay is lifted when the appellate court affirms the denial of the plea to the jurisdiction.

Roma Independent School District v. Noelia M. Guillen, Raul Moreno, Dagoberto Salinas and Tony Saenz · filed 2013-02-25(b)

Because we are affirming the denial of the plea, the automatic stay statutorily imposed by section 51.014(b) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code is lifted.

Section 51.014(b) stays the commencement of trial during an interlocutory appeal of a special appearance order, but does not automatically stay all proceedings.

Linda S. Restrepo and Carlos E. Restrepo, D/B/A Collectively RDI Global Services and R & D International v. Alliance Rig · filed 2013-09-17(b)

An appeal of such an order does not result in an automatic stay of all proceedings in the case.

Section 51.014(b)'s automatic stay of trial-court proceedings remains in effect while a petition for review is pending in the Texas Supreme Court.

in Re Ryder Integrated Logistics, Inc and Ryder Integrated Logistics of Texas, LLC · filed 2014-01-15(b)

Relators have advised that a petition for review is currently pending in the Texas Supreme Court and, accordingly, the automatic stay of all proceedings in the trial court will remain in effect while that proceeding is pending.

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays trial and all other trial court proceedings while a governmental unit’s interlocutory appeal from the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction is pending.

City of Leon Valley v. WM. Rancher Estates Joint Venture · filed 2014-08-27(b)

Once the notice of appeal was filed, all proceedings in the trial court, including any trial, were automatically stayed pursuant to the statute.

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays all other trial court proceedings during an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction, including hearings and orders concerning supersedeas.

in Re Texas Education Agency and Michael L. Williams, Commissioner Of Education for the State of Texas · filed 2014-07-18(b)

Conducting hearings and signing the challenged orders denying supersedeas was an abuse of the district court’s discretion because it violated the automatic stay of “all other proceedings in the trial court” under section 51.014(b).

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays trial court proceedings pending resolution of an interlocutory appeal under subsection (a)(8).

Archer Group, LLC and John Christian Archer II v. City of Anahuac · filed 2014-08-11(b)

Under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 51.014(a)(8), all proceedings in the trial court are automatically stayed pending resolution of this interlocutory appeal. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014(b). Accordingly, the motion for temporary relief to stay proceedings and enforcement of an order is dismissed as moot.

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays trial court proceedings during an interlocutory appeal under subsection (a)(8), making a separate motion to stay those proceedings moot.

Archer Group, LLC and John Christian Archer II v. Chambers-Liberty Counties Navigation District · filed 2014-08-11(b)

Under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 51.014(a)(8), all proceedings in the trial court are automatically stayed pending resolution of this interlocutory appeal. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014(b). Accordingly, the motion for temporary relief to stay proceedings and enforcement of an order is dismissed as moot.

An interlocutory appeal under subsection (a)(8) automatically stays all trial court proceedings pending resolution of the appeal.

Archer Group, LLC and John Christian Archer II v. Anahuac Municipal Development District · filed 2014-08-11(b)

Under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 51.014(a)(8), all proceedings in the trial court are automatically stayed pending resolution of this interlocutory appeal. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014(b). Accordingly, the motion for temporary relief to stay proceedings and enforcement of an order is dismissed as moot.

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays all trial court proceedings pending an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a motion to dismiss under section 27.003.

in Re I-10 Colony, Inc. · filed 2015-02-24(b)

Section 51.014(b) creates a bright line rule, staying “the commencement of a trial” and “all other proceedings in the trial court” pending resolution of the interlocutory appeal.

Section 51.014(b)’s automatic stay does not prevent a trial court from simultaneously signing an order granting a temporary injunction and an order denying a motion to dismiss when both implement its prior verbal rulings.

Rowland Martin, Jr. v. Edward L. Bravenec and 1216 West Ave., Inc. · filed 2015-05-18(b)

Because the trial court simultaneously executed the order granting the temporary injunction and the order denying the motion to dismiss under section 27.003 based on its prior verbal rulings, we hold the section 51.014(b) automatic stay did not deprive the trial court of the jurisdiction to execute the order granting the temporary stay.

A final judgment entered despite the stay under § 51.014(b) is voidable.

Copano NGL Services, LLC v. John Ashcraft, Individually and as Trustee for the John Ashcraft Family Trust 2012 · filed 2015-10-05(b)

we must decide whether the trial court's failure to observe the stay made the final judgment void or merely voidable. ... We conclude it is voidable.

Section 51.014(b) stays trial court proceedings, including discovery, while an interlocutory appeal of a TCPA dismissal ruling is pending.

in Re Mary Ann Roser · filed 2016-05-05(b)

The trial court’s proceedings, including all discovery and Roser’s deposition, are stayed pending resolution of the interlocutory appeal. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(b) (West Supp. 2015).

Section 51.014(c) requires a timely jurisdictional challenge and a timely request for submission or hearing to obtain an automatic stay during an interlocutory appeal.

in Re: Texas Department of Transportation · filed 2016-10-14(c)

When the appeal is taken under Subsection (a)(8), as in this case, the automatic stay is available only when the plea to the jurisdiction is filed, and the hearing requested, within the timeframe set forth in Subsection (c). ... The mandamus record establishes that TxDOT filed its jurisdictional challenge within Section 51.014’s deadline, but it has not shown that it requested a hearing on its summary judgment motion by the deadline.

Section 51.014 excludes appeals from temporary injunctions from the interlocutory appeals that stay commencement of a trial while the appeal is pending.

DK8, LLC, HBT Land, LLC And Kenneth L. Schnitzer, Jr., an Individual v. HBT JV, LLC, a Texas Limited Liability Company, · filed 2016-10-19

Section 51.014 expressly excludes appeals from temporary injunctions from those interlocutory appeals that stay commencement of a trial in the trial court pending resolution of the appeal.

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays trial court proceedings when a party takes an interlocutory appeal authorized by subsection (a)(5) or (a)(8).

Draper v. Greg Guernsey, in His Official Capacity as Director of Planning and Development Watershed Protectio · filed 2017-01-05(b)

Under either statutory ground, furthem1ore, Draper's appeal automatically stayed proceedings in the trial court, see Tex. Civ. Prac: & Rem. Code§ 51.0l4(b), providing him the relief he has requested through a separate motion for stay. Accordingly, we dismiss Draper's stay motion as moot.

Section 51.014(b)'s automatic stay reaches all activities and hearings in an MDL pretrial court while an appeal from the denial of a governmental unit's plea to the jurisdiction is pending.

in Re Volkswagen Clean Diesel Litigation: Texas Clean Air Act Enforcement Cases · filed 2017-01-11(b)

Considering the automatic-stay provision in the context of MDL pre-trial litigation—i.e., several separate causes of action transferred to a district court for consolidated or coordinated consideration of pre-trial matters—“all other proceedings in the trial court” necessarily encompasses all the activities and hearings in the MDL pretrial court case, not only the proceedings in the individual causes of action before the MDL pretrial court that are subject to the State’s interlocutory appeal.

Section 51.014(b)’s stay may be lifted to allow a plaintiff to file a nonsuit when the defendants have made no claim for affirmative relief.

City of Sealy, Texas, Mark Stolarski, Mayor and Larry Kuciemba, City Manager v. Town Park Center · filed 2017-03-20(b)

The clerk’s record reveals no claim for affirmative relief by Sealy. Accordingly, we order the trial court stay lifted for the limited purpose of allowing Town Park to file its nonsuit in the trial court.

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays trial court proceedings during an interlocutory appeal from an order denying a plea to the jurisdiction.

City of Dallas v. Elsabet Duressa, Individually and as Next Friends of G.Y., a Minor, Carlos Marcias-Collazo and Maria L · filed 2017-11-20(b)

The interlocutory appeal of this order automatically stays proceedings in the trial court.

Section 51.014(b) stays the commencement of trial while an interlocutory appeal from an order denying a motion to dismiss is pending.

in Re Patti J. Wagner, as Guardian of Jenny Wagner, an Incapacitated Adult · filed 2017-12-14(b)

Further, Uduma’s interlocutory appeal from respondent’s order denying her motion to dismiss stayed the commencement of a trial pending resolution of the appeal.

An appeal from a temporary injunction under subsection (a)(4) does not stay all trial court proceedings under subsection (b).

Mark Adams Waterloo Medical Labs, LLC Ashton Kouzbari and Strategic Medical Services, LLC v. Diversifie · filed 2017-09-15(a)(4), (b)

The emergency motion is denied with respect to Appellants’ request to stay all proceedings in the trial court. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)(4), (b) (West Supp. 2016); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 29.1.

Section 51.014(b) stays trial and all other trial court proceedings while an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction is pending.

State v. Signal Drilling, LLC, Jaten Oil Company, and Riparia, LC · filed 2017-12-20(b)

One such limiting statute is section 51.014(b) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code which provides that an interlocutory appeal of an order denying a plea to the jurisdiction filed by a governmental unit stays commencement of a trial and also stays “all other proceedings in the trial court pending resolution of the appeal.”

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays trial court proceedings during an interlocutory appeal from an order granting or denying a plea to the jurisdiction, subject to limited exceptions.

Cameron County District Attorney in His Official Capacity Representing the State of Texas v. JLM Games and GGL Vendor Le · filed 2018-01-12(b)

With limited exceptions that do not apply here, section 51.014(b) imposes an automatic stay of the trial court proceedings when a party files an interlocutory appeal of the trial court’s decision to grant or deny a plea to the jurisdiction.

Section 51.014(d) requires trial court permission to appeal an otherwise unappealable interlocutory order.

Torres v. Marie Diaz, Mark Galvan, Pursuit of Excellence, Inc. Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport · filed 2018-07-17(d)

That section requires, among other things, permission from the trial court to appeal an otherwise unappealable interlocutory order. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(d). Appellant has not met the requirements for an appeal under section 51.014(d).

Section 51.014 automatically stays trial during an interlocutory appeal from denial of a special appearance when the defendant timely files the appearance and requests a hearing.

Gesswein v. Gesswein · filed 2018-06-22(b), (c)

Because Thomas timely filed and requested a hearing on his special appearance, his interlocutory appeal automatically triggered a stay of any trial in the county court.

An interlocutory appeal from the denial of a TCPA motion to dismiss stays other trial court proceedings pending resolution of the appeal.

Hughes v. Giammanco · filed 2018-10-30(a)(12), (b)

Appellant’s emergency motion to stay trial court proceedings pending resolution of this interlocutory appeal of the trial court’s order denying her motion to dismiss under the Texas Citizens Participation Act is GRANTED. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)(12), (b) (interlocutory appeal of denial of TCPA motion to dismiss “stays all other proceedings in the trial court pending resolution of that appeal”). This stay is effective until the case in this Court is finally decided or the Court otherwise orders the stay lifted.

Section 51.014(b) stays all trial court proceedings while an interlocutory appeal under subsection (a)(12) is pending.

Benajmin "B.J." Reynolds, Mark Mewshaw and Wes Hobbs and Terra Energy Partners LLC v. Sanchez Oil & Gas Corporation · filed 2018-11-08(b)

The automatic stay imposed by section 51.014(b) creates a bright line rule, staying “the commencement of a trial” for most interlocutory appeals under section 51.014(a), and it “also stays all other proceedings in the trial court” pending resolution of any interlocutory appeal filed under section 51.014(a)(12), as here.

Section 51.014 stays trial-court proceedings pending final resolution of an interlocutory appeal under subsection (a)(12).

McDonald Oilfield Operations, LLC v. 3B Inspection, LLC Robert Beall, Chris Myrand, Kyle Grant, Patrick Bage and Dylan R · filed 2019-02-07(a)(12), (b)

All proceedings in the trial court are stayed pending the final resolution of this appeal. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014(a)(12), (b).

Section 51.014(c) automatically stays trial court proceedings during the interlocutory appeal, and the trial court cannot ignore the stay.

State v. Jimmy Glen Riemer, Richard Coon, Jr., June Meetze Coon Trust, Hap Johnson Realty Co., LLC, and W.R. Edwards, Jr · filed 2019-02-15(c)

The statutory stay of section 51.014(c) arises automatically and is absolute. ... Accordingly, in light of the facts and law discussed, we deny appellees’ motion to modify the stay.

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays trial court proceedings during an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction, but a party may obtain permission from the court of appeals to lift the stay for a limited purpose.

San Jacinto River Authority v. Bauer · filed 2018-12-18(b)

Under those circumstances, while trial court proceedings are automatically stayed pursuant to section 51.014(b), a party to the underlying proceeding has the general right to seek and obtain permission from the court of appeals to lift the stay and permit the trial court to proceed for a limited purpose. ... We grant the relief requested. The stay is lifted for the limited purpose of permitting appellees to file a nonsuit in the underlying action.

An appellate court may deny a request to determine whether an interlocutory appeal stays trial court proceedings when the request does not allege that the trial court has decided the stay issue.

the Roman Catholic Bishop of San Bernardino, and Bishop Gerald R. Barnes v. Doe · filed 2019-05-13(b), (c)

Appellee’s motion seeks our determination of whether the trial court proceedings or the commencement of trial is stayed while this interlocutory appeal is pending. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(b), (c). However, appellee’s motion does not allege that the trial court has made any determination as to whether the trial court proceedings or the commencement of trial is stayed. We therefore deny appellee’s motion.

Section 51.014(b) stays all other trial court proceedings while an interlocutory appeal under section 51.014(a)(12) is pending.

Alexandria Marrujo and Allied Stone, Inc v. Wisenbaker Builder Services, Inc. · filed 2019-04-09(b)

The automatic stay imposed by section 51.014(b) creates a bright line rule which “stays all other proceedings in the trial court” pending resolution of any interlocutory appeal filed under section 51.014(a)(12), as here.

Section 51.014(c)(2) entitles an appellant to a stay of trial court proceedings when the plea to the jurisdiction and hearing request were filed within 180 days after the original answer.

Goliad County, Texas v. Bonnet · filed 2019-04-15(c)(2)

Appellant asserts the stay is statutorily mandated because appellant filed its plea and requested a hearing within 180 days from the date it filed its original answer. See id. § 51.014(c)(2). ... The Court, having examined and fully considered the matters on file herein, is of the opinion that appellant is entitled to a stay of the trial court proceedings. Accordingly, we grant appellant’s motion to stay and we order the trial court proceedings stayed pending resolution of this appeal or further order of this Court.

Section 51.014(b)'s automatic stay provisions exclude appeals from temporary injunction proceedings.

Production Lift Companies, Inc. and Wireline Services, Inc. v. Rafael Valdez and Kenny Ortiz · filed 2019-05-31(b)

Appeals from temporary injunction proceedings are expressly excluded from the automatic stay provisions of Section 51.014 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code.

Section 51.014(b) stays all trial court proceedings during specified interlocutory appeals, and a court of appeals cannot lift the stay for a limited purpose.

in Re Geomet Recycling LLC, Richard Goldberg, Kenneth Goldberg, Josh Applebaum, Alicia McKinney, Eloisa Medina, Lee Waks · filed 2019-06-14(b)

Here, the court of appeals’ order lifted the stay only for a limited purpose, but the statute contains no indication that courts of appeals may authorize further trial court proceedings as long as those proceedings are “limited.” The statute stays “all other proceedings in the trial court,” not “some” or “most” such proceedings.

Section 51.014(b)’s automatic stay of trial court proceedings takes effect when the interlocutory appeal is filed.

Borderline Management, LLC v. Suzann Ruff · filed 2019-06-20(b)

The automatic stay, however, does not take effect until the interlocutory appeal is filed.

Section 51.014(b)'s automatic stay may be lifted by the court of appeals when the parties agree.

Agilex Supply Chain, LLC v. Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations, LLC · filed 2019-07-18(b)

However, the court of appeals may lift the stay if the parties so agree.

Section 51.014(b) stays all trial court proceedings while an interlocutory appeal under subsection (a)(8) is pending.

Alejandro Hernandez and the Freedom Indeed Foundation, Inc. v. Constable R.A. Sommers Precinct 7 · filed 2019-08-28(b)

If the interlocutory appeal is based on Subsection (a)(8), as in this case, all proceedings in the case are stayed pending resolution of the appeal.

Subsection (b) supports staying a pending summary judgment hearing and other trial court proceedings during an interlocutory appeal.

Harlandale Independent School District v. Jasmine Engineering Inc. · filed 2019-09-24(b)

We GRANT appellant’s emergency motion for emergency relief and ORDER the hearing on the pending motion for partial summary judgment, as well as all other trial court proceedings, stayed until further order of this court. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(b).

Section 51.014(b) stays all trial court proceedings while a covered interlocutory appeal is pending.

City of Brownsville, Texas, Tony Martinez, Rose Z. Gowen, Ricardo Longoria Jr., Joel Munguia, Ben Neece, and Jessica Tet · filed 2019-09-27(b)

According to § 51.014(b), all action in the trial court is stayed pending termination of the appeal.

Filing a notice of appeal from a TCPA dismissal order stays all trial court proceedings pending resolution of the appeal.

Alex E. Jones Infowars, LLC And Free Speech Systems, LLC v. Leonard Pozner and Veronique De La Rosa · filed 2019-11-05(b)

However, filing the notice of appeal of the district court’s order on the First Motion to Dismiss stayed all proceedings in the trial court pending resolution of this appeal.

Section 51.014(b) stays proceedings in the trial court during the appeal; moving a shed outside those proceedings does not violate the stay.

Oak Point Board of Adjustment v. Houle · filed 2019-12-12(b)

Because Section 51.014(b) stays only proceedings in the trial court, Houle’s argument hinges on the implicit assumption that working with Pope to move the shed was itself a proceeding in the trial court within the meaning of that provision.

An interlocutory appeal from an order granting a temporary injunction does not automatically stay trial court proceedings.

Verde Energy Solutions LLC and Roberto R. Thomae v. SGET Duval Oil I LLC · filed 2019-12-19(a)-(b)

We further DENY “Appellee’s Motion to Refer Compliance and Enforcement of Temporary Injunction to Trial Court” without prejudice to requesting that relief in the trial court. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)-(b) (an interlocutory appeal to grant of temporary injunction is not subject to automatic stay of proceedings in trial court pending resolution of appeal).

Section 51.014(b) imposes a mandatory stay during certain interlocutory appeals that the appellate court cannot lift even for a limited purpose.

San Jacinto River Authority v. Ogletree · filed 2020-01-28(b)

First, we lack authority to lift the legislatively mandated stay in section 51.014(b), even for a limited purpose.

Section 51.014(b)’s stay of trial court proceedings does not apply to an appeal from a trial court’s refusal to rule on a Chapter 27 motion to dismiss.

Calkins v. Carolyn Calkins James and Maurice Bresenhan, Jr., Administrator of the Estate of Mary Olive H · filed 2020-02-28(b)

Instead, appellant is attempting to appeal from a refusal to rule on his motion, which is neither an authorized appeal nor covered by the stay. Accordingly, the motion for an emergency stay relief is denied.

Section 51.014(b)’s automatic stay covers proceedings in all cases transferred to an MDL pretrial court when an interlocutory appeal is filed in one of those cases.

in Re Fraudulent Hospital Lien Litigation · filed 2019-12-19(b)

Accordingly, we conclude that the automatic stay applies to stay proceedings in all of the cases transferred to the MDL pretrial court, not just the proceedings in the individual cases subject to interlocutory appeal.

Section 51.014(b) stays trial-level proceedings pending resolution of an interlocutory appeal under subsection (a)(12).

Bovee v. Heinz North America Div. of J.H. Heinz Co., L.P. CBS News, Inc. Michael Kasper Heinz Michael Charles · filed 2020-01-30(b)

We are compelled to grant appellant’s motion and order all trial-level proceedings stayed pending resolution of appellant’s interlocutory appeal.

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays trial court proceedings pending resolution of an appeal covered by the subsection.

the City of San Antonio v. Smith · filed 2020-02-06(b)

Because all proceedings in the trial court are automatically stayed by statute pending resolution of this appeal, the motion is MOOT; however, the trial court is instructed that all proceedings in the underlying case are stayed pending resolution of this appeal.

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays all trial-court proceedings, including discovery, during a covered interlocutory appeal and prevents the trial court from signing an order authorizing discovery.

in Re Kinder Morgan Production Company LLC · filed 2020-03-26(b)

On January 10, 2020, all trial-court proceedings in both the 2018 and 2019 Appraisal Cases were stayed pending the resolution of the interlocutory appeal in each case. Judge Armstrong, therefore, had no discretion to sign an order that authorized the Taxing Units to conduct discovery in the 2018 and 2019 Appraisal Cases.

Section 51.014 limits a trial court’s authority to revisit a TCPA ruling while an interlocutory appeal is pending.

In RE PRAVEEN PANCHAKARLA v. the State of Texas · filed 2020-05-08(b)

Section 51.014 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code constrains the trial court’s authority to act on a prior ruling, but only when an interlocutory appeal is pending.

Section 51.014 constrains a trial court’s authority to act on a prior ruling only while an interlocutory appeal is pending.

in Re: Mike Hartley and Janie Hartley · filed 2020-09-21(b)

Section 51.014 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code constrains the trial court’s authority to act on a prior ruling, but only when an interlocutory appeal is pending.

Section 51.014(b) stays trial court proceedings during an interlocutory appeal, and the appellate court may enforce the stay by ordering pleadings filed during it struck and refusing further filings until the appeal is resolved.

NuNu v. Nancy Nunu Risk and Charles L. NuNu · filed 2020-12-15(b)

This case was stayed, and remains stayed, in the probate court, pursuant to section 51.014 (b) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(b) (staying all proceeding in the trial court until resolution of interlocutory appeal). Without lifting the stay, we order Harris County Probate Court Number 2 to strike the pleadings filed by appellant during the stay and to further enforce the stay by refusing to accept filings from either party in this matter until this appeal is resolved.

Section 51.014(b) stays the trial when an appeal under the section is filed.

Weeks Marine, Inc. v. Carlos · filed 2021-01-27(b)

Section 51.014(b) provides that the filing of this appeal stays the trial.

A notice of interlocutory appeal under section 51.014(b) automatically stays trial court proceedings, even when the motion remains pending.

CBS Stations Group of Texas, LLC v. Cedric Burns · filed 2020-12-03(b)

Thus, CBS’s TCPA motion was not denied by operation of law, but instead remained pending in the trial court when CBS filed the notice of appeal. The notice of appeal automatically stayed all trial court proceedings. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(b).

Section 51.014(b) requires a trial court to stay trial until an interlocutory appeal covered by the subsection is finally disposed.

Third Coast Services, LLC and SpawGlass Civil Construction, Inc. v. Felicitas Castaneda, Individually and as Representat · filed 2022-11-10(b)

Accordingly, we order the trial court to enforce the statutory stay mandated by section 51.014(b) and stay trial until this appeal is finally disposed.

Section 51.014(b) stays the start of trial during certain interlocutory appeals; trial may proceed after the appeal is dismissed.

Creston Lawrence Leong and American Medical Response Ambulance Service, Inc. v. Velasquez · filed 2023-11-07(b)

Rule 42.1(a)(1) does not provide for a remand; however, because this is an interlocutory appeal, upon this court’s judgment of dismissal, the underlying case may proceed to trial. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014 (b) (imposing stay of commencement of trial pending resolution of appeal in certain interlocutory appeals).

Section 51.014(b) stays all trial court proceedings while a governmental unit’s interlocutory appeal from the denial of its plea to the jurisdiction is pending.

In Re: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department v. the State of Texas · filed 2024-05-23(b)

Therefore, § 51.014(b) automatically stayed the commencement of trial and all other proceedings in trial court pending resolution of the appeal.

Section 51.014(b) automatically stays proceedings in the trial court during an interlocutory appeal under section 51.014(a)(8), including attempted enforcement of subpoenas by that court.

In Re Nonparty Patient No. 1, Nonparty Patient No. 2, Nonparty Patient No. 3, Nonparty Patient No. 4, Nonparty Patient N · filed 2025-03-21(b)

To the extent appellees request that we stay any attempted enforcement of the subpoenas by the Dallas County district court, we conclude that the automatic stay already prevents that action.

Section 51.014(b)’s automatic stay of trial court proceedings lasts until the appellate mandate issues.

In Re Lynn Madison · filed 2025-10-31(b)

We hold that an interlocutory appeal is not resolved, and the automatic stay accompanying such an appeal does not expire, until the appellate mandate issues.

Section 51.014(c)(2)’s 180-day deadline determines whether an appeal automatically stays trial court proceedings; it does not set the deadline to file the appeal.

Jeanette Jimmerson of the Texas Military Department – Texas State Guard; Darren Fitzgerald of the Texas State Military – · filed 2025-12-30(c)(2)

The 180-day deadline refers to whether an appeal for the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction automatically stays the trial court proceedings. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 51.014(c)(2). It is not a deadline for filing the appeal.

Section 51.014(b)’s automatic stay expires when the appellate mandate issues.

City of San Antonio v. Schaak · filed 2026-02-11(b)

The automatic...stay imposed by Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 51.014(b) will automatically expire upon issuance of the mandate.

Section 51.014(b)’s automatic stay is unavailable to an entity that is not a governmental unit.

San Benito Economic Development Corporation, Inc., Fred Sandoval, Mario Palomo, Ruben Cortez, Anna Garza Llanes, Daniel · filed 2026-05-21(b)

Finally, even if we were to find the trial court did in fact rule on SBEDC’s jurisdictional challenge prior to the temporary injunction hearing—without considering whether or not the rescission of the oral order was valid—SBEDC could not avail itself of the automatic stay in section 51.014(b) because we have found it is not a governmental unit and it cannot invoke appellate jurisdiction pursuant to the statute.

Section 51.014(d) permits an otherwise unavailable interlocutory appeal when the trial court grants permission in a written order.

in Re Irving Drobny, as Representative of National Accident Insurance Group and National Accident Insurance Underwriters · filed 2016-08-30(d)

Section 51.014(d) provides, in pertinent part, that “a trial court in a civil action may, by written order, permit an appeal from an order that is not otherwise appealable” if certain conditions are met.

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not permit a private contractor to appeal denial of its plea to the jurisdiction as a governmental unit when its authority comes from a city contract rather than constitutional or statutory law.

ASM Global, LLC D/B/A Destination El Paso and ASM Global Parent, Inc. v. Jessica Weaver, Individually and as Representat · filed 2024-10-04(a)(8)

Because ASM is not deemed a governmental unit for purposes of §51.014(a)(8), our interlocutory jurisdiction is not properly invoked.

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not permit an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction by a state official sued in an individual capacity.

Warren Kenneth Paxton, Jr. v. Commission for Lawyer Discipline · filed 2024-04-18(a)(8)

The civil practice and remedies code permits an appeal from an interlocutory order that “grants or denies a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit as that term is defined in Section 101.001.” TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)(8). ... We conclude the Commission’s suit is against Paxton in his individual rather than official capacity. Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction to consider Paxton’s appeal from an interlocutory order denying his plea to the jurisdiction because the civil practice and remedies code does not expressly permit his interlocutory appeal.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an appeal from the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction when the potential claims include claims against government employees in their official capacities.

In Re Gordon Independent School District, Bryson Oliver, Allan Ladd, Holly Campbell, Mike Reed, Shelle Crenshaw, and Kat · filed 2023-03-02(a)(8)

Because some of Hinkson’s potential claims are broad enough to include an action against the named deponents in their official capacities, we conclude that the named deponents may appeal the denial of their plea to the jurisdiction under Section 51.014(a)(8).

Section 51.014(a)(8) authorizes an interlocutory appeal from an order granting or denying a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit.

Lin v. Fu · filed 2022-11-18(a)(8)

Although Section 51.014 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code expressly authorizes an interlocutory appeal from a trial court order that “grants or denies a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit,” nothing in the record suggests that appellant is a “governmental unit.”

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not provide an interlocutory appeal to an appellant that is not a governmental unit.

in Re Modivcare Solutions, LLC Formerly Known as LogistiCare Solutions, LLC · filed 2022-04-21(a)(8)

The statute is reserved for governmental units. ... Based on the record, we conclude Appellant is not a governmental unit under section 101.001. ... Accordingly, this court does not have jurisdiction to consider Appellants’ interlocutory appeal.

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not authorize an interlocutory appeal from dismissal of an individual-capacity Section 1983 claim on qualified immunity grounds because that dismissal is not a ruling on a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction.

Luna v. Tyler · filed 2021-08-26(a)(8)

Thus, the trial court’s order dismissing Luna’s Section 1983 claim cannot be one that “grant[ed] or denie[d] a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit.” See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014(a)(8). For that reason, Luna’s appeal of the trial court’s ruling on his Section 1983 claim is not authorized by Section 51.014(a)(8) and we lack jurisdiction to review it.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction when an earlier motion raised only a merits argument; the denial of the plea triggers the time to appeal.

Town of Westlake, Texas v. City of Southlake, Texas · filed 2021-12-23(a)(8)

We conclude that because the plea to the jurisdiction was the first occasion when the jurisdictional argument was presented to the trial court, the denial of the plea was the first event to trigger Westlake’s right to appeal under Section 51.014(a)(8) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an official sued in an official capacity to appeal the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction, including when the plaintiff alleges ultra vires conduct.

Steve Griffith, in His Official Capacity, Douglas Brinkley, in His Offiicial Capacity, Scott Schultz in His Official Cap · filed 2015-12-01(a)(8)

We necessarily have jurisdiction to consider that underlying contention as part of our jurisdiction, under section 51.014(a)(8), to determine whether the officials enjoy governmental immunity.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from a ruling on a plea to the jurisdiction only if the entity that filed the plea qualifies as a governmental unit.

University of the Incarnate Word v. Redus · filed 2015-08-26(a)(8)

Because Section 51.014(a)(8) permits the filing of an interlocutory appeal only by the same entity that filed a plea to the jurisdiction, and UIW filed the plea, UIW is the entity that must qualify as a “governmental unit” to be permitted this interlocutory appeal.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from a ruling on a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction; ERCOT does not qualify as a governmental unit for that purpose.

Hwy 3 Mhp, Llc v. Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) · filed 2015-03-12(a)(8)

For all of these reasons, particularly in light of the analysis from LTTS Charter School, we conclude that ERCOT is not a governmental unit as that term is used in section 101.001(3)(D). See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 101.001(3)(D). For that reason, we must also conclude that this Court does not have jurisdiction over HWY 3’s interlocutory appeal. See id. § 51.014(a)(8).

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal when a trial court denies a governmental unit’s challenge to subject matter jurisdiction, regardless of the procedural vehicle used.

American Idol, General, LP D/B/A the REO, and Randy Hanson A/K/A Randall Hanson v. Pither Plumbing Co., Inc. · filed 2015-04-09(a)(8)

The Legislature provided for an interlocutory appeal when a trial court denies a governmental unit’s challenge to subject matter jurisdiction, irrespective of the procedural vehicle used.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from an order granting or denying a plea to the jurisdiction when the plea is by a governmental unit.

Bob Clifton, Individually and D/B/A Watchdog Society of Denton v. Burroughs · filed 2008-12-23(a)(8)

Section 51.014(8) of the civil practice and remedies code provides that a person may appeal from an interlocutory order that grants or denies a plea to the jurisdiction by a “governmental unit” as that term is defined in section 101.001. ... Clifton is not a “governmental unit” as that term is defined. Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction over Clifton’s appeal from the trial court’s order denying his plea to the jurisdiction.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits the Attorney General, as a governmental unit, to appeal the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction.

Cornyn v. Schoppa Family · filed 2001-11-29(a)(8)

Because the trial court denied appellant’s motion to dismiss, we must first consider whether subsection (a)(8) of the statute authorizes interlocutory appeals from the grant or denial of a plea to the jurisdiction “by a governmental unit as that term is defined in Section 101.001.” ... We agree with that holding and the court’s reasoning and, in applying that reasoning, we hold that the Attorney General is likewise a “governmental unit” within the purview of the statute. Thus, we do have jurisdiction to consider appellant’s appeal.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal by the governor, lieutenant governor, or secretary of state when sued in an official capacity because those officeholders qualify as governmental units.

Perry v. Del Rio · filed 2001-08-09(a)(8)

An office cannot function except through the acts of its officeholder. Although the legislature could have included the words "state officials," "elected officials sued in their official capacity," or similar terms in section 101.001's definition of "governmental units," the inclusion of the term "offices" indicates an intent to include state officials sued in their official capacity. Furthermore, the governor, lieutenant governor, and secretary of state comprise the executive department and an organ of government, deriving their authority from the state constitution. For these reasons, we hold that this Court has jurisdiction to consider the interlocutory appeal under section 51.014(a)(8).

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits state officials sued in their official capacities to appeal an interlocutory order denying their pleas to the jurisdiction.

Perry v. Brown · filed 2001-10-04(a)(8)

The appellees argue that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the appellants are not “governmental units” under the sections of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code that provide for interlocutory appeals. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. §§51.014(a)(8), 101.001 (West Supp. 2001). For the reasons we set out in Del Rio, we overrule the appellees’ motion to dismiss and will consider the appeal.

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not authorize an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction by individual city officials who do not qualify as governmental units.

Helen Gallagher, Barney Knight and James Miller v. Young · filed 2001-10-25(a)(8)

We believe this case is distinguishable from Del Rio and that appellants in this case are not "governmental units" as defined by section 101.001. Therefore, strictly construing section 51.014(a)(8), we hold we do not have jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an immediate appeal from an order denying a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction, including an appeal by an official sued in an official capacity.

Potter County Attorney's Office v. Stars & Stripes Sweepstakes · filed 2003-09-12(a)(8)

This section provides that an order granting or denying a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit, as that term is defined by section 101.001, may be challenged immediately by appeal. ... Consequently, Letson in her capacity as County Attorney and the Office of County Attorney are entitled to appeal the district court's order denying their plea to the jurisdiction.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an immediate appeal from an order denying a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction, including an appeal by an official sued in an official capacity.

Rodriguez v. State · filed 2005-05-19(a)(8)

Consequently, Letson in her capacity as County Attorney and the Office of County Attorney are entitled to appeal the district court's order denying their plea to the jurisdiction.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from a ruling on the Attorney General’s plea to the jurisdiction because the Attorney General is a governmental unit.

Blanco v. State · filed 2006-07-20(a)(8)

Because the trial court denied appellant's motion to dismiss, we must first consider whether subsection (a)(8) of the statute authorizes interlocutory appeals from the grant or denial of a plea to the jurisdiction "by a governmental unit as that term is defined in Section 101.001." ... We agree with that holding and the court's reasoning and, in applying that reasoning, we hold that the Attorney General is likewise a "governmental unit" within the purview of the statute. Thus, we do have jurisdiction to consider appellant's appeal.

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not entitle an individual employee of a governmental unit to an interlocutory appeal.

TEXAS EDUC. v. Donna Indep. Sch. Dist. · filed 2007-03-22(a)(8)

We hold that Martinez is not a "governmental unit," and therefore, he is not entitled to an interlocutory appeal.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from an order granting or denying a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit.

Cantu Services, Inc. v. United Freedom Associates, Inc. · filed 2010-11-03(a)(8)

As UFA is not a governmental unit, we do not find that any of the statutorily-permitted exceptions in Section 51.014 would permit Cantu's appeal of the trial court's interlocutory order in this case.

Section 51.014(a)(8) allows an open-enrollment charter school to appeal an interlocutory order on its plea to the jurisdiction because the school is a governmental unit under the incorporated definition.

LTTS Charter School, Inc. v. C2 Construction, Inc. · filed 2011-06-17(a)(8)

Accordingly, because Universal Academy is a "governmental unit" under the Tort Claims Act, the court of appeals had jurisdiction to hear Universal Academy's interlocutory appeal under Section 51.014(a)(8).

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from an order granting or denying a plea to the jurisdiction when the party raising the plea is a governmental unit.

Arbor E & T Llc., D/B/A Rescare Workforce Services v. Lower Rio Grande Valley Workforce Development Board Inc. D/B/A Wor · filed 2013-12-05(a)(8)

Accordingly, we conclude that we have jurisdiction to decide this interlocutory appeal because Workforce Solutions is a “governmental unit.” See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. §§ 51.014(a)(8), 101.001(3).

Section 51.014(a)(8) allows an economic development corporation to appeal an interlocutory order denying its plea to the jurisdiction because it qualifies as a governmental unit for that purpose.

City of Leon Valley Economic Development Corporation v. Little · filed 2013-12-31(a)(8)

Thus, we hold that an EDC is a governmental unit for purposes of interlocutory appeal under section 51.014(a)(8).

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal of an order granting or denying a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction.

Johnson v. Harris County · filed 2017-02-09(a)(8)

Section 51.014(a)(8) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code provides that a person may appeal an interlocutory order that “grants or denies a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit.” TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)(8) (Vernon Supp. 2016); see id. § 101.001 (defining “governmental unit”). To the extent that it addresses the Harris County Defendants’ jurisdictional challenges, the December 9 Order is an appealable interlocutory order.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits a governmental unit to appeal an interlocutory order denying a jurisdictional challenge; appealability depends on the substance of the filing rather than its caption.

City of Dallas, Mike Rawlings, Scott Griggs, Adam Medrano, Casey Thomas II, Carolyn King Arnold, Rickey D. Callahan, Mon · filed 2017-07-20(a)(8)

Civil practice and remedies code section 51.014(a)(8) allows an appeal from an interlocutory order that “grants or denies a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit as that term is defined in Section 101.001.” ... The availability of an interlocutory appeal will not be decided by the form or caption of a pleading but will be determined by the substance of the motion to determine the relief sought. ... Because we liberally construe the issues presented, we construe the City and the City Official’s first issue as a challenge to the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction.

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not allow a private party to file an interlocutory appeal from an order concerning a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction.

in Re Sustainable Texas Oyster Resource Management, L.L.C. · filed 2019-05-10(a)(8)

STORM was not involved in the District’s plea to the jurisdiction and, as a private party, it could not file an interlocutory appeal under TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014(a)(8), which is reserved for orders that grant or deny “a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit.”

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal of a ruling on a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit; a private contractor that does not qualify as a governmental unit cannot use that appeal.

City of New Braunfels, Texas And YC Partners Ltd., D/B/A Yantis Company v. Carowest Land, Ltd. · filed 2019-05-16(a)(8)

Because Yantis has not shown that it is a governmental entity under section 101.001, Yantis may not pursue an interlocutory appeal.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from an order granting or denying a plea to the jurisdiction only when the plea is by a governmental unit as defined in section 101.001.

Gonzales Nursing Operations, LLC F/D/B/A Texas Nursing & Rehab of Gonzales v. Alta Mae Smith, Rosie L. Smith, Alton Alle · filed 2020-09-23(a)(8)

Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 51.014(a)(8) represents a narrow exception to that rule, authorizing an interlocutory appeal from an order that “grants or denies a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit as that term is defined in Section 101.001.” TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014(a)(8). ... Because Gonzales is not a governmental unit, we lack jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal.

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not authorize an individual to appeal the denial of his own motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Mark Joseph Watson D/B/A Mark Joseph Watson©, Ens Legis v. Texas State University · filed 2020-12-30(a)(8)

Watson is an individual, not a governmental unit, and thus Section 51.014(a)(8) does not authorize him to appeal from an interlocutory order denying his own motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits a Type A economic development corporation to appeal an interlocutory order denying its plea to the jurisdiction because it qualifies as a governmental unit.

Hitchcock Industrial Development Corporation v. Cressman Tubular Products Corporation · filed 2024-07-18(a)(8)

Because the Legislature expressly expanded section 101.001’s governmental-unit definition to include Type A economic development corporations, the Corporation is a governmental unit for purposes of the interlocutory appeal authorized by section 51.014(a)(8).

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from an order granting or denying a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction; an entity that does not qualify as a governmental unit cannot appeal under it.

Aventine Tarrant Parkway Apartments, LP v. Etling · filed 2025-10-09(a)(8)

Because Aventine LP does not qualify as a governmental unit under Section 101.001(3)(D), the trial court’s order denying Aventine LP’s plea to the jurisdiction is not an appealable order.

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not authorize an interlocutory appeal in a suit between private parties.

In Re Genesis Fong v. the State of Texas · filed 2025-12-30(a)(8)

But as Fong acknowledges, § 51.014(a)(8) authorizes an interlocutory appeal of certain orders in suits involving “the State or its subdivisions.” This provision does not apply to suits between private parties.

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not authorize an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a court-appointed receiver’s plea to the jurisdiction because the receiver is not a governmental unit.

Robert Berleth and Berleth & Associates, PLLC v. Northcutt · filed 2026-04-09(a)(8)

We believe a fair reading of the statute forecloses Berleth’s interlocutory appeal because a court-appointed receiver does not constitute a governmental unit as contemplated by Sections 51.014(a)(8) and 101.001(3).

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from a ruling on a plea to the jurisdiction only when the party bringing the appeal is itself a governmental unit.

Texas Cordia Construction, LLC v. Deanira Cantu, Pablo Rubalcaba, Domingo Pena, Jr., Janet Pena, Monica Cavazos, Juanita · filed 2026-06-04(a)(8)

Rather, we must assess whether TCC itself is a governmental unit as the party attempting to invoke our interlocutory jurisdiction pursuant to Section 51.014(a)(8).

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal of an order granting or denying a governmental unit's jurisdictional challenge, but not an order dismissing third-party claims on non-jurisdictional grounds.

The State of Texas v. Nonparty Patient No. 1, Nonparty Patient No. 2, Nonparty Patient No. 3, Nonparty Patient No. 4, No · filed 2025-04-14(a)(8)

Texas statutes do not authorize an interlocutory appeal from an order granting a governmental unit's motion to dismiss third-party claims on non-jurisdictional grounds.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal of a plea to the jurisdiction only if a governmental unit filed the plea.

ETC Field Services, LLC FKA. Regency Field Services, LLC v. Tema Oil and Gas Company · filed 2025-02-21(a)(8)

But an interlocutory appeal of a plea to the jurisdiction is available only if the plea was filed by a “governmental unit.” See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014(a)(8).

Section 51.014(a)(8) gives governmental units an accelerated appeal from an order granting or denying a plea to the jurisdiction, protecting them from unnecessary litigation and pretrial discovery.

In Re Bexar Medina Atascosa Counties Water Control and Improvement District Number One; George Weimer, President; Bob Ro · filed 2025-02-12(a)(8)

Second, relators’ right to an accelerated appeal to review the trial court’s jurisdictional ruling was impaired. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 51.014(a)(8) (authorizing interlocutory appeal from order granting or denying a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit). The Legislature specifically granted governmental units like BMA the right to an accelerated appeal from a ruling on plea to the jurisdiction for the purpose of avoiding the expense of unnecessary litigation, including pretrial discovery.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from a ruling on a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction; a discovery order issued while the court reserves its ruling does not constitute an implicit denial.

Rusk State Hospital and Texas Health and Human Services Commission v. McGowan · filed 2024-10-31(a)(8)

Rather, the trial court stayed a ruling on the plea and expressly declined to rule on the plea to the jurisdiction, reserving a ruling for a later date. And we decline to construe the discovery order in this case as a ruling on the merits sufficient to constitute an implicit denial of the plea to the jurisdiction.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from an order denying a plea to the jurisdiction only when a governmental unit brought the plea.

St. John Missionary Baptist Church, Inc. of Dallas, Texas v. Michael Rollerson and Gloria Smith Rollerson, Individually · filed 2024-07-24(a)(8)

This Court does not have jurisdiction over interlocutory appeals from orders denying a plea to the jurisdiction unless the plea was brought by a governmental unit.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal of a governmental unit’s subject-matter jurisdiction challenge raised through a summary judgment motion.

The City of Castle Hills v. Robinson · filed 2024-06-26(a)(8)

Therefore, to the extent the City’s summary judgment motion argued that the trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, it was a plea to the jurisdiction, and we have jurisdiction over the City’s jurisdictional complaints in this appeal.

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not permit an interlocutory appeal when the trial court abates its ruling on a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction and allows discovery instead of granting or denying the plea.

City of Laredo v. Rodriguez · filed 2024-03-06(a)(8)

Under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 51.014, “[a] person may appeal from an interlocutory order of a district court . . . that . . . grants or denies a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit[.]” TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)(8). Here, the trial court’s order was not a final judgment, and it did not grant or deny the City’s plea to the jurisdiction. Instead, that order expressly abated the court’s ruling on the plea until a later date and granted appellee’s motion for a continuance to conduct additional discovery on jurisdictional issues.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal of a governmental unit’s plea to the jurisdiction, including a Rule 91a motion based on governmental immunity, but does not permit an appeal of a Rule 91a ruling on nonjurisdictional grounds.

Harris County Texas v. Deary · filed 2024-01-23(a)(8)

But to the extent Harris County seeks to appeal the trial court’s ruling on its alternative Rule 91a motion to dismiss, we have no appellate jurisdiction to review that interlocutory order. ... When a Rule 91a motion seeks dismissal on jurisdictional grounds based on governmental immunity, we may treat the motion as a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit, for which we do have authority to review interlocutory orders. ... But, as we have already stated, Harris County’s motion did not seek dismissal based on jurisdictional or governmental immunity grounds.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a governmental unit’s summary judgment motion asserting immunity from suit.

City of Houston v. Cruz · filed 2023-12-28(a)(8)

We hold that this Court has jurisdiction under Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 51.014(a)(8) to review the trial court’s interlocutory order denying the City’s motion for summary judgment.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a governmental unit’s immunity challenge even when the challenge was made through a Rule 91a motion rather than a plea to the jurisdiction.

City of Houston v. Houston Metro Security and James Fowler · filed 2023-03-23(a)(8)

For purposes of our appellate jurisdiction, it is not significant that the City sought dismissal of appellees’ claims against it by filing a motion to dismiss rather than a plea to the jurisdiction, as referenced in Section 51.014(a)(8).

Section 51.014(a)(8) does not permit an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a governmental entity’s summary-judgment motion that asserts only res judicata and raises no jurisdictional challenge.

The City of Houston v. James Construction Group, LLC · filed 2023-03-09(a)(8)

The City’s summary-judgment motion, exclusively based on its assertion of res judicata following the City Engineer’s decision, raised no ground based on immunity, and cannot reasonably be construed as a plea to the jurisdiction or any other jurisdictional challenge.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal when a governmental unit’s Rule 91a motion challenges the trial court’s subject-matter jurisdiction, regardless of the motion’s title.

City of Madisonville v. Ivan Aristides Cruz Hernandez, Andrew Diaz, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of · filed 2022-12-07(a)(8)

Because we look to the substance of the City’s Rule 91a motion and not the title of the motion, and because the City’s Rule 91a motion to dismiss challenges the trial court’s ... subject-matter jurisdiction, we have jurisdiction over this appeal from the denial of the City’s Rule 91a motion to dismiss under section 51.014(a)(8) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal when a trial court denies a governmental unit’s challenge to subject matter jurisdiction, even if the challenge was raised by a motion for summary judgment.

the Port of Houston Authority v. Morales · filed 2022-09-08(a)(8)

However, as we noted above, an interlocutory appeal may be had when a trial court denies a governmental unit’s challenge to subject matter jurisdiction, “irrespective of the procedural vehicle used.” Atser, 403 S.W.3d at 357; see Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(a).

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from an order granting a plea to the jurisdiction when the plea is made by a governmental unit.

Central States Water Resources, Inc. v. Terra Southwest, Inc. · filed 2022-08-11(a)(8)

An order granting a plea to the jurisdiction is an appealable interlocutory order if such plea to the jurisdiction is made by a governmental unit.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a governmental unit’s jurisdictional plea only when the motion challenges the court’s authority to decide a cause of action; a motion challenging only defenses does not qualify.

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, Jesse L. Myrow, and Wesley R. Myrow · filed 2022-04-07(a)(8)

We conclude that the substance of TCEQ’s motion for partial summary judgment—which did not challenge the district court’s authority to decide any specific causes of action, did not attempt to defeat any cause of action, did not seek dismissal of the underlying suit for want of jurisdiction, and challenged only certain defenses that Union Pacific and the Myrows pleaded as to TCEQ’s claims in a suit that TCEQ initiated against them—is not a plea to the jurisdiction and that subsection 51.014(a)(8) does not confer interlocutory appellate jurisdiction in this matter.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal when a trial court denies a governmental entity’s jurisdictional claim, regardless of whether the claim was raised by a plea to the jurisdiction, a summary judgment motion, or another procedure.

Falls County Appraisal District, Allen McKinley and Andrew J. Hahn v. Wally R. and Voncyle Rusty Burns · filed 2022-03-23(a)(8)

Therefore, if the trial court denies a governmental entity’s claim of no jurisdiction, whether it has been asserted by a plea to the jurisdiction, a motion for summary judgment, or otherwise, an interlocutory appeal may be brought under subsection 51.014(a)(8).

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal when a governmental unit raises a jurisdictional challenge through a Rule 91a motion, with review limited to the pleadings.

Office of the Attorney General of Texas v. James Blake Brickman, J. Mark Penley, David Maxwell, and Ryan M. Vassar · filed 2021-10-21(a)(8)

Because we look to the substance of the OAG’s arguments more than the vehicle used to assert them, the appeal may proceed pursuant to section 51.014(a)(8), but our review is limited to the pleadings, as required by rule 91a.6.

Section 51.014(a)(8) permits an interlocutory appeal from a plea to the jurisdiction filed by a state employee in an official capacity, but not from one based on a personal immunity defense asserted in an individual capacity.

Cecil Adams and Maxine Adams v. Harris County and Christopher A. Prine, Clerk of the First Court of Appeals · filed 2015-12-09(a)(8)

The court’s order granting the plea filed by Prine in his official capacity is appealable under section 51.014(a)(8). ... The plea to the jurisdiction filed by Prine in his individual capacity was based on his claim of quasi-judicial immunity, a personal defense that is not based on the governmental unit’s immunity. Therefore, the trial court’s ruling on the plea was not one that “grant[ed] or denie[d] a plea to the jurisdiction by a governmental unit,” and the Adamses’ interlocutory appeal is not authorized by section 51.014(a)(8).