Texas Codes

Tex. Educ. Code § 21.304 (2026)

Decision Of Commissioner

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 21.304. DECISION OF COMMISSIONER. (a) The commissioner's decision must be in writing and must include findings of fact and conclusions of law. The commissioner may adopt by reference and incorporate findings of fact or conclusions of law from the local record.

(b) The commissioner must issue a decision not later than the 30th day after the last day on which a response to the petition for review may be filed under Section 21.301(b). If the commissioner fails to issue a decision within that time, the decision of the board is affirmed.

(c) The commissioner shall send a copy of the decision to each party or the party's representative by certified mail. The commissioner shall keep a record of the mailing. A party is presumed to be notified of the decision on the date the decision is received, as indicated by the certified mail return receipt.

(d) The commissioner shall maintain and index decisions of the commissioner issued under this section with the recommendations or decisions of the hearing examiner.

(e) If the commissioner reverses the action of the board of trustees, the commissioner shall order the school district to reinstate the teacher and to pay the teacher any back pay and employment benefits from the time of discharge or suspension to reinstatement.

(f) Instead of reinstating a teacher under Subsection (e), the school district may pay the teacher one year's salary to which the teacher would have been entitled from the date on which the teacher would have been reinstated.

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

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 16 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: Stratton v. Austin Indep. Sch. Dist., 8 S.W.3d 26 (Tex. App. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Stratton v. Austin Indep. Sch. Dist., 8 S.W.3d 26 (Tex. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.304(a) (West 1996).”

Goodie v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist., 57 S.W.3d 646 (Tex. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.304(e). The Board next appealed to the district court.”

Miller v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist., 51 S.W.3d 676 (Tex. App. 2001). “303(b)(2) (Vernon 1996); 19 Tex.Admin.Code § 157.1071(g) (2000).”

Moses v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 12 S.W.3d 168 (Tex. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.304(b) (Vernon 1996).”

Farris v. Fort Bend Indep. Sch. Dist., 27 S.W.3d 307 (Tex. App. 2000). “Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.304(a) (Vernon 1996).”

Lindsay ex rel. Lindsay v. South San Antonio Indep. Sch. Dist., 983 S.W.2d 778 (Tex. App. 1998). “See Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.304(e) (Vernon 1996).”

Fort Worth Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Joseph Palazzolo (Tex. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Educ. Code Ann. § 21.304 (f). February 17, 2012: FWISD sends a letter to Palazzolo’s attorney enclosing checks for $10,740.”

Klein Indep. Sch. Dist. & Mike Morath, Texas Comm'r of Educ. v. Alana Sisk (Tex. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “” TEX. EDUC. CODE § 21.304(e). The school district may instead evidence was not presented that Sisk failed “to meet the accepted standards of conduct for the profession as generally recognized and applied in similarly situated school districts in this state,”2 we affirm the…”

Port Arthur Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Dwight Wagner (Tex. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “INTRODUCTION This lawsuit is a judicial appeal of the Texas Commissioner of Education’s October 1, 2024, decision, issued pursuant to Texas Education Code §§ 21.304 and 21.307, which affirmed the Independent Hearing Examiner’s Recommendation that Port Arthur ISD properly…”

Los Fresnos Consol. Indep. Sch. Dist. & Michael L. Williams, Comm'r of Educ. v. Jorge Vazquez (Tex. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “22 Tex. Educ. Code § 21.304 (f) ............”

Garcia v. Corpus Christi Indep. Sch. Dist., 866 F. Supp. 2d 646 (S.D. Tex. 2011). · cites it 2× “” Tex. Educ.Code § 21.304(e) (West 2006). However, section 21.”

Lindsay v. So. San Antonio Ind. Sch. Dist., 983 S.W.2d 778 (Tex. App. 1998). “See TEX. EDUC.CODE ANN. § 21.304(e) (Vernon 1996).”

Show all 16 citing cases →

— Tex. Educ. Code § 21.304(a) — 3 cases

Stratton v. Austin Indep. Sch. Dist., 8 S.W.3d 26 (Tex. App. 1999). “See Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.304(a) (West 1996).”

Miller v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist., 51 S.W.3d 676 (Tex. App. 2001). “303(b)(2) (Vernon 1996); 19 Tex.Admin.Code § 157.1071(g) (2000).”

Farris v. Fort Bend Indep. Sch. Dist., 27 S.W.3d 307 (Tex. App. 2000). “Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.304(a) (Vernon 1996).”

— Tex. Educ. Code § 21.304(b) — 1 case

Moses v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 12 S.W.3d 168 (Tex. App. 2000). “Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.304(b) (Vernon 1996).”

— Tex. Educ. Code § 21.304(e) — 8 cases

Goodie v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist., 57 S.W.3d 646 (Tex. App. 2001). “See Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.304(e). The Board next appealed to the district court.”

Lindsay ex rel. Lindsay v. South San Antonio Indep. Sch. Dist., 983 S.W.2d 778 (Tex. App. 1998). “See Tex. Educ.Code Ann. § 21.304(e) (Vernon 1996).”

Klein Indep. Sch. Dist. & Mike Morath, Texas Comm'r of Educ. v. Alana Sisk (Tex. App. 2023). “” TEX. EDUC. CODE § 21.304(e). The school district may instead evidence was not presented that Sisk failed “to meet the accepted standards of conduct for the profession as generally recognized and applied in similarly situated school districts in this state,”2 we affirm the…”

Lindsay v. So. San Antonio Ind. Sch. Dist., 983 S.W.2d 778 (Tex. App. 1998). “See TEX. EDUC.CODE ANN. § 21.304(e) (Vernon 1996).”

Crowley Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Carl Stoneham, & Mike Morath, in His Off. Capacity as Comm'r of Educ. of Texas (Tex. App. 2025).

— Tex. Educ. Code § 21.304(f) — 1 case

Garcia v. Corpus Christi Indep. Sch. Dist., 866 F. Supp. 2d 646 (S.D. Tex. 2011). “” Tex. Educ.Code § 21.304(e) (West 2006). However, section 21.”

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.