Texas Codes

Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002 (2026)

Jury

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Sec. 105.002. JURY. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a party may demand a jury trial.

(b) A party may not demand a jury trial in:

(1) a suit in which adoption is sought, including a trial on the issue of denial or revocation of consent to the adoption by the managing conservator; or

(2) a suit to adjudicate parentage under Chapter 160.

(1) a party is entitled to a verdict by the jury and the court may not contravene a jury verdict on the issues of:

(A) the appointment of a sole managing conservator;

(B) the appointment of joint managing conservators;

(D) the determination of which joint managing conservator has the exclusive right to designate the primary residence of the child;

(E) the determination of whether to impose a restriction on the geographic area in which a sole managing conservator or joint managing conservator may designate the child's primary residence; and

(F) if a restriction described by Paragraph (E) is imposed, the determination of the geographic area within which the sole managing conservator or joint managing conservator must designate the child's primary residence; and

(2) the court may not submit to the jury questions on the issues of:

(A) support under Chapter 154 or Chapter 159;

(B) a specific term or condition of possession of or access to the child; or

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 20, Sec. 1, eff. April 20, 1995. Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 751, Sec. 12, eff. Sept. 1, 1995; Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 180, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1997; Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 556, Sec. 3, eff. Sept. 1, 1999; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 821, Sec. 2.10, eff. June 14, 2001; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1036, Sec. 2, 22, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.

Amended by:

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 317 (H.B. 7), Sec. 6, eff. September 1, 2017.

Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., Ch. 228 (H.B. 868), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2021.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 147 cases (27 in the last 5 years), 1996–2026 · leading case: Lenz v. Lenz, 79 S.W.3d 10 (Tex. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lenz v. Lenz, 79 S.W.3d 10 (Tex. 2002). · cites it 5× “The precise issues presented for our review are: (1) whether Romy produced legally sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict; and (2) if she did, whether Texas Family Code § 105.002 permits a trial court to impose a geographic restriction on a child’s primary residence…”

Harris v. Texas Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 228 S.W.3d 819 (Tex. App. 2007). · cites it 10× “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002 (West Supp.2006).”

In the Interest of Walters, 39 S.W.3d 280 (Tex. App. 2001). · cites it 3× “Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(c)(1) (Vernon Supp.”

in the Interest of K.D.H., a Child, 426 S.W.3d 879 (Tex. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “1, § 15; Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(a),(b)(West 2014); Tex.”

in the Interest of P.A.C & K.V.C., Child., 498 S.W.3d 210 (Tex. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(c)(1)(B) (Vernon 2014) (“the court may not contravene a jury verdict on ,.”

In the Interest of Rodriguez, 940 S.W.2d 265 (Tex. App. 1997). · cites it 4× “TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 105.002(c) (Vernon 1996); e.”

in the Interest of N.L.D., a Child, 412 S.W.3d 810 (Tex. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “Sufficiency of Evidence—Termination and Conservatorship In its answer to questions one through three, the jury found by clear and convincing evidence that (1) Haines failed to support N.”

in Re Kathleen Elizabeth Reiter, 404 S.W.3d 607 (Tex. App. 2010). · cites it 4× “TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 105.002 (Vernon 2008).”

Dane Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Mable K., 2013 WI 28 (Wis. 2013). · cites it 2× “31 (2); Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 105.002 (West 2012); Okla.”

Taylor v. Texas Dep't of Prot. & Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641 (Tex. App. 2005). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(c), (d); Rodriguez, 940 S.”

In Re Samford, 249 S.W.3d 761 (Tex. App. 2008). · cites it 3× “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(a)(c) (Vernon Supp.”

Stallworth v. Stallworth, 201 S.W.3d 338 (Tex. App. 2006). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002 (Vernon Supp.”

Show all 147 citing cases →

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(1) — 1 case

C. S. D. & J. D. v. Texas Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs. (Tex. App. 2024).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(a) — 14 cases

in the Interest of K.D.H., a Child, 426 S.W.3d 879 (Tex. App. 2014). “1, § 15; Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(a),(b)(West 2014); Tex.”

Monroe v. Alternatives in Motion, 234 S.W.3d 56 (Tex. App. 2007).

In the Interest of M.T.C. & D.L.C., Jr., Minor Child., 299 S.W.3d 474 (Tex. App. 2009).

In the Interest of A.S., 241 S.W.3d 661 (Tex. App. 2007).

In Re Mtc, 299 S.W.3d 474 (Tex. App. 2009).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(a)(c) — 1 case

In Re Samford, 249 S.W.3d 761 (Tex. App. 2008). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(a)(c) (Vernon Supp.”

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(b) — 1 case

in the Matter of Troy S. Poe Trust (Tex. 2022).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c) — 17 cases

In the Interest of Rodriguez, 940 S.W.2d 265 (Tex. App. 1997). “TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 105.002(c) (Vernon 1996); e.”

Taylor v. Texas Dep't of Prot. & Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641 (Tex. App. 2005). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(c), (d); Rodriguez, 940 S.”

Harris v. Texas Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 228 S.W.3d 819 (Tex. App. 2007). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002 (West Supp.2006).”

Danet v. Bhan, 436 S.W.3d 793 (Tex. App. 2014).

Brown v. Brown, 917 S.W.2d 358 (Tex. App. 1996).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(1) — 12 cases

Harris v. Texas Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 228 S.W.3d 819 (Tex. App. 2007). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002 (West Supp.2006).”

In the Interest of Walters, 39 S.W.3d 280 (Tex. App. 2001). “Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(c)(1) (Vernon Supp.”

in the Interest of K.D.H., a Child, 426 S.W.3d 879 (Tex. App. 2014). “1, § 15; Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(a),(b)(West 2014); Tex.”

in the Interest of Z.K.S., a Child (Tex. App. 2020).

In Re Drs, 138 S.W.3d 467 (Tex. App. 2004).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(1)(A) — 12 cases

in the Interest of N.L.D., a Child, 412 S.W.3d 810 (Tex. App. 2013). “Sufficiency of Evidence—Termination and Conservatorship In its answer to questions one through three, the jury found by clear and convincing evidence that (1) Haines failed to support N.”

Harris v. Texas Dep't of Fam. & Prot. Servs., 228 S.W.3d 819 (Tex. App. 2007). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002 (West Supp.2006).”

In Re Samford, 249 S.W.3d 761 (Tex. App. 2008). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(a)(c) (Vernon Supp.”

In Re Jaj, 243 S.W.3d 611 (Tex. 2007).

In the Interest of J.A.J., 243 S.W.3d 611 (Tex. 2007).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(1)(B) — 1 case

in the Interest of P.A.C & K.V.C., Child., 498 S.W.3d 210 (Tex. App. 2016). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(c)(1)(B) (Vernon 2014) (“the court may not contravene a jury verdict on ,.”

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(1)(C) — 2 cases

In the Interest of A. J., a Child v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2023).

In the Interest of C.R., a Child v. the State of Texas (2026).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(1)(D) — 12 cases

Lenz v. Lenz, 79 S.W.3d 10 (Tex. 2002). “The precise issues presented for our review are: (1) whether Romy produced legally sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict; and (2) if she did, whether Texas Family Code § 105.002 permits a trial court to impose a geographic restriction on a child’s primary residence…”

Epps v. Deboise, 537 S.W.3d 238 (Tex. App. 2017).

Doncer v. Dickerson, 81 S.W.3d 349 (Tex. App. 2002).

Sylvia Yolanda Arredondo v. Antonio A. Betancourt, Jr., 383 S.W.3d 730 (Tex. App. 2012).

In the Interest of A.D., 474 S.W.3d 715 (Tex. App. 2014).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(1)(E) — 5 cases

in the Interest of S.M.D., a Child, 329 S.W.3d 8 (Tex. App. 2010).

In Re Smd, 329 S.W.3d 8 (Tex. App. 2010).

in the Interest of A. N. G., a Child (Tex. App. 2021).

in the Interest of I.R.H. & Z.T.H., Child. (Tex. App. 2016).

in the Matter of the Marriage of James Robert Mugford & Leanna Maria Mugford (Tex. App. 2018).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(2) — 7 cases

In the Interest of Walters, 39 S.W.3d 280 (Tex. App. 2001). “Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(c)(1) (Vernon Supp.”

In Re Samford, 249 S.W.3d 761 (Tex. App. 2008). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(a)(c) (Vernon Supp.”

in Re Jennifer Webb-Goetz (Tex. App. 2019).

Prabhakar Gopalan v. Andrea Marsh (Tex. 2026).

in the Matter of the Marriage of Allan Ray Comstock & Mindy Lee Comstock (Tex. App. 2021).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(2)(A) — 2 cases

In the Interest of A.M.W., 313 S.W.3d 887 (Tex. App. 2010).

In Re Amw, 313 S.W.3d 887 (Tex. App. 2010).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(2)(B) — 4 cases

in the Interest of W.B.B., a Child (Tex. App. 2018).

in the Interest of Z.K.S., a Child (Tex. App. 2020).

In the Interest of A. J., a Child v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2023).

In the Interest of A.I.M. & A.I.M. v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2023).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(2)(C) — 2 cases

in the Interest of P.A.C & K.V.C., Child., 498 S.W.3d 210 (Tex. App. 2016). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(c)(1)(B) (Vernon 2014) (“the court may not contravene a jury verdict on ,.”

in Re Kathleen Elizabeth Reiter, 404 S.W.3d 607 (Tex. App. 2010). “TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 105.002 (Vernon 2008).”

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(3) — 1 case

In the Interest of Walters, 39 S.W.3d 280 (Tex. App. 2001). “Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 105.002(c)(1) (Vernon Supp.”

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(l) — 1 case

In the Interest of D.R.S., 138 S.W.3d 467 (Tex. App. 2004).

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(c)(l)(A)(C) — 1 case

in Re Kathleen Elizabeth Reiter, 404 S.W.3d 607 (Tex. App. 2010). “TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 105.002 (Vernon 2008).”

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(d) — 1 case

— Tex. Fam. Code § 105.002(e) — 1 case

Albrecht v. Albrecht, 974 S.W.2d 262 (Tex. App. 1998).

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.