Texas summary judgment practice is no longer governed solely by party-driven deadlines under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166a. With the enactment of Senate Bill 293, the Legislature imposed mandatory timelines on courts themselves for the consideration and disposition of summary judgment motions. These statutory requirements materially affect how summary judgment motions move through Texas trial courts and how litigants should track and manage dispositive motions.
What Is Senate Bill 293?
Senate Bill 293 added Section 23.303 to the Texas Government Code, establishing statutory deadlines that require Texas trial courts to act on motions for summary judgment within defined timeframes. Unlike Rule 166a, which governs when parties must file motions, responses, and evidence, SB 293 focuses on when the court must consider and rule on a fully briefed motion.
This represents a significant shift. Historically, Texas courts faced no enforceable statutory deadline to hear or rule on summary judgment motions. SB 293 was enacted to address prolonged delays, increase transparency, and promote timely resolution of dispositive motions.
The Court’s Mandatory Deadlines Under SB 293
Section 23.303 of the Texas Government Code imposes two core timing requirements once a summary judgment motion is fully briefed:
1. 45-Day Deadline to Hear or Consider the Motion
After the response to a motion for summary judgment is filed, the trial court must either hold a hearing or consider the motion without oral argument within 45 days.
If the court elects to rule on the written submissions without a hearing, the statute requires the court to record the date of consideration on the docket, creating a clear reference point for tracking compliance.
2. 90-Day Deadline to Issue a Written Ruling
After the motion is heard or taken under submission, the court must issue a written ruling within 90 days of the hearing date or the date of consideration without oral argument.
The statute does not dictate the substance of the ruling. It requires only that the court issue a written order granting or denying the motion within the prescribed timeframe.
What SB 293 Does Not Do
SB 293 is important, but its scope is limited. It does not:
- Alter the substantive standards for summary judgment
- Change the burdens under traditional or no-evidence motions
- Modify the filing or response deadlines under Rule 166a
- Guarantee a ruling in favor of either party
- Automatically provide relief if a court misses a deadline
Instead, SB 293 establishes mandatory expectations for judicial action, not outcomes.
How SB 293 Interacts with Rule 166a
Rule 166a and SB 293 operate in parallel, not in conflict.
- Rule 166a governs party deadlines:
when motions, responses, and evidence must be filed and served. - SB 293 governs court deadlines:
when the court must hear, consider, and rule on a motion after it is fully briefed.
Because SB 293’s deadlines are triggered by the filing of the response and the hearing or submission date, accurate calculation of response deadlines under Rule 166a is now more important than ever.
Scheduling Orders and SB 293
Scheduling orders commonly control when summary judgment motions may be filed or heard. SB 293 does not eliminate that authority. Instead, once a motion is properly before the court and fully briefed, the statute imposes outer limits on how long the court may take to act.
In practice, this means litigants must track:
- the scheduling order’s dispositive-motion deadlines,
- Rule 166a’s notice and response periods, and
- SB 293’s court-action deadlines.
Transparency and Reporting Requirements
SB 293 also introduced reporting and transparency requirements. Court clerks must periodically report compliance with Section 23.303 to the Office of Court Administration, and statewide compliance information is made publicly available.
These reporting obligations reinforce the statute’s purpose: ensuring that summary judgment motions do not remain undecided indefinitely.
Practical Implications for Litigants
SB 293 changes how lawyers should manage summary judgment practice in Texas:
- Motions should be clearly set for hearing or submission once responses are filed.
- Counsel should track the 45-day consideration window and the 90-day ruling window.
- Docket entries reflecting submission dates matter.
- Extended inaction is no longer simply a matter of court discretion.
While the statute does not specify remedies, missed deadlines may inform requests for hearings, status conferences, or other appropriate relief depending on the circumstances.
Tracking SB 293 Deadlines on CourtDeadlines
Because SB 293 imposes deadlines on courts rather than parties, it would behoove litigants to closely track:
- the date a summary judgment response is filed,
- the 45-day deadline for hearing or consideration, and
- the 90-day deadline for a written ruling.
These statutory deadlines now belong in every Texas litigator’s calendar.
Key Takeaway
Senate Bill 293 fundamentally changed Texas summary judgment practice by imposing mandatory court-action deadlines for the consideration and disposition of summary judgment motions. Together with Rule 166a, SB 293 creates a comprehensive timing framework governing both party obligations and judicial obligations in Texas summary judgment proceedings.