Tex. Codes » Education Code · TITLE 2. PUBLIC EDUCATION · SUBTITLE D. EDUCATORS AND SCHOOL DISTRICT EMPLOYEES AND VOLUNTEERS · CHAPTER 21. EDUCATORS
Texas Codes

Tex. Educ. Code § 21.209 (2026)

Appeal

✓ laws through the 89th Legislature (2025)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 21.209. APPEAL. A teacher who is aggrieved by a decision of a board of trustees on the nonrenewal of the teacher's term contract may appeal to the commissioner for a review of the decision of the board of trustees in accordance with the provisions of Subchapter G. The commissioner may not substitute the commissioner's judgment for that of the board of trustees unless the board's decision was arbitrary, capricious, unlawful, or not supported by substantial evidence.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 260, Sec. 1, eff. May 30, 1995.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1971–2025 · leading case: Gilder v. Meno, 926 S.W.2d 357 (Tex. App.—Austin 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gilder v. Meno, 926 S.W.2d 357 (Tex. App.—Austin 1996). · cites it 7× “Laws 2847 , 2848 (formerly Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.207(a), since repealed and recodified at Tex.”
Nairn v. Killeen Indep. Sch. Dist., 366 S.W.3d 229 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2012). · cites it 3× “See Tex.Educ.Code Ann. § 21.209 (West 2006); see also Brown v.”
Ysleta Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Griego, 170 S.W.3d 792 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2005). · cites it 2× “Tex.Educ. Code Ann. §§ 21.209, 21.301. The Commissioner’s decision may then be appealed to (1) a district court in the county in which the district’s central administrative offices are located or (2) if agreed by all parties, a district court in Travis County.”
Montgomery Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Davis, 34 S.W.3d 559 (Tex. 2000). “Tex. Educ.Code § 21.209. The commissioner reviews the board’s decision, and may not substitute his or her judgment for that of the board “unless the board’s decision was arbitrary, capricious, unlawful, or not supported by substantial evidence.”
Gutierrez v. Laredo Indep. Sch. Dist., 139 S.W.3d 363 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2004). “See Tex. Educ.Code Ann. §§ 21.152, et seq. (Vernon 1996).”
Peaster Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Glodfelty, 63 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2001). “See Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.209 (Vernon 1996).”
Larsen v. Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist., 296 S.W.3d 118 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2009). ““Teacher” is defined by the Education Code as “a superintendent, principal, supervisor, classroom teacher, counselor, or other full-time professional employee who is required to hold a certificate issued under [sections 21.”
Garrett v. Judson Indep. Sch. Dist., 299 F. App'x 337 (5th Cir. 2008). “Further, a teacher aggrieved by a decision of the Board not to renew the teacher’s term employment contract is entitled to appeal to the Commissioner for a review of that decision; Garrett did not make such an appeal.”
Farris v. Fort Bend Indep. Sch. Dist., 27 S.W.3d 307 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000). “Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.209 (Vernon 1996) (authorizing Commissioner to review decisions of boards of trustees of independent school districts).”
Sonia Herrera Marquez v. Clint Indep. Sch. Dist., 445 S.W.3d 450 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2014). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Educ. Code Ann. § 21.209 (West 2012).”
Hander v. San Jacinto Junior Coll., 325 F. Supp. 1019 (S.D. Tex. 1971). “002(b) provides that: All authority not vested by this chapter or by other laws of the state in the coordinating board or in the Central Education Agency is reserved and retained locally in each of the respective public junior college districts or in the governing boards of such…”
Tarrant v. Clear Creek Indep. Sch. Dist., 238 S.W.3d 445 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007). “See Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.209 (Vernon 2006).”
Show all 30 citing cases →
Tex. Educ. Code § 21.209(a): 1 case
Gilder v. Meno, 926 S.W.2d 357 (Tex. App.—Austin 1996). “Laws 2847 , 2848 (formerly Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.207(a), since repealed and recodified at Tex.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.