Texas eviction procedures have been significantly reshaped. During the 89th Legislative Session, the Texas Legislature enacted Senate Bill 38, prompting the Texas Supreme Court to completely rewrite Rule 510 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Effective January 1, the revised rule establishes a singular framework for eviction cases — streamlining procedures, limiting local court discretion and reinforcing private property protections. Bell Nunnally’s Karen Hart and Ned Wilkinson break down what landlords, property managers and tenants need to know.

Although S.B. 38 does not change the substantive standards for possession, it materially alters how eviction cases are administered in justice and county courts. “Collectively, the bill is designed to streamline the eviction process, protect due process rights, and reinforce private property protections within the state’s judicial framework.” Sen. Paul Bettencourt et al., SB 38, Texas Policy Research, https://www.texaspolicyresearch.com/bills/89th-legislature-sb-38/ (last visited Dec. 29, 2025). SB 38 offers more refined legal framework, reduces some potentially contentious or administratively burdensome elements, and focuses more narrowly on procedural efficiency and judicial clarity. See id.

A Standalone Rule Governing Evictions

Under the revised framework, Rule 510 is now the sole procedural rule governing eviction cases. The general justice-court rules, Rules 500 through 507, no longer apply. See Preliminary Approval of Amendments to Rule 143a and Part V of the Texas rules of Civil Procedure, Miscellaneous Docket No. 25-9096. This change eliminates confusion created by overlapping or inconsistent procedural requirements and clarifies that eviction proceedings are subject only to the procedures expressly set out in Rule 510. Moreover, Rule 143a clarifies that costs on appeal in eviction cases are governed exclusively by Rule 510.19, and that the general cost-payment provisions applicable to justice-court appeals do not apply in eviction appeals. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 143a.

Limits on Local Rules and Court-Imposed Requirements

One of the most consequential changes is the restriction placed on local court practices. Justice courts may no longer impose procedural requirements beyond those authorized by Rule 510. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.24(b). Courts are prohibited from requiring additional pleadings, filings, mediation, pretrial conferences or other proceedings as a condition to trial. Id.

In effect, this change will likely limit the effect of historically inconsistent local practices that complicated eviction proceedings. For commercial landlords, the change reduces uncertainty and administrative delay. For tenants, it underscores the importance of strict compliance with the requirements expressly stated in Rule 510, as courts have less discretion to allow or require additional steps.

Additional Procedural changes under SB 38

SB 38 also introduces several practical changes affecting how landlords can initiate eviction cases. Notably, the bill expands permissible methods of delivering notices to vacate. In addition to traditional mailing or hand delivery, notices may now be sent by commercial delivery services such as UPS or FedEx, and by email. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.005 (c) In a tenant-protective change, the first instance of rent delinquency requires a notice to pay or vacate, rather than an immediate notice to vacate. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.6(a)(11).

The bill also modifies service procedures in eviction cases. If service of citation is not completed within five business days after filing, or if a writ of possession is not executed within five business days after issuance, a landlord may arrange for service by another authorized law enforcement officer. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.08(d)(2). SB 38 also further authorizes a limited summary disposition process in forcible entry cases and adjusts certain timelines when federally mandated notice requirements apply, including in subsidized housing contexts. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.10

Appeals and Possession Pending Appeal

S.B. 38 preserves the expedited nature of eviction appeals while reinforcing that appeals are not intended to delay possession. Courts must hold a de novo trial on all appeals within 21 days of filing. Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.20(c). To file an appeal, a party must further affirm a good faith belief that the purpose is not for delay and that the party has a meritorious defense. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.19(a). This affirmation is not reviewable by the justice court. Id.

Further, under Rule 510.19, simply appealing does not automatically stay enforcement of a judgment for possession. To remain in possession during the appeal, the appellant must, within five days of the date of appeal, pay into the justice court registry the amount sought in the notice, and must continue to pay into the registry the rental amount at the beginning of each pay period. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.19(d)(2). If the required bond or deposit is not timely filed, the prevailing party may proceed with enforcement, including obtaining a writ of possession, notwithstanding the pending appeal. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 510.19(d)(2)(D). These provisions emphasize that eviction appeals remain limited in scope and tightly governed by rule-based deadlines.

Practical Takeaways

Commercial landlords, property managers and tenants should take note of these procedural changes and take action. Notice and eviction forms, filing protocols, defense and appeal strategies should be reviewed to ensure alignment with the rewritten Rule 510. By consolidating eviction procedures into a single, exclusive rule and eliminating extraneous requirements, S.B. 38 brings greater clarity, but also demands careful compliance with the rule as written.