Tex. Codes » Family Code · TITLE 5. THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP AND THE SUIT AFFECTING THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP · SUBTITLE B. SUITS AFFECTING THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP · CHAPTER 153. CONSERVATORSHIP, POSSESSION, AND ACCESS
Texas Codes

Tex. Fam. Code § 153.135 (2026)

Equal Possession Not Required

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 153.135. EQUAL POSSESSION NOT REQUIRED. Joint managing conservatorship does not require the award of equal or nearly equal periods of physical possession of and access to the child to each of the joint conservators.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 20, Sec. 1, eff. April 20, 1995.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: London v. London, 94 S.W.3d 139 (Tex. App. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
London v. London, 94 S.W.3d 139 (Tex. App. 2002). · cites it 4× “" Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 153.135 (Vernon 1996); see also Norris v.”
Blackwell v. Humble, 241 S.W.3d 707 (Tex. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “) (access allows conservator to visit and communicate with child; possession allows conservator to exercise control over child to exclusion of others); see also Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 153.135 (West 2002) ("Joint managing conservatorship does not require the award of equal or…”
Dennis v. Smith, 962 S.W.2d 67 (Tex. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “" TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 153.135 (Vernon 1996).”
Norris v. Norris, 56 S.W.3d 333 (Tex. App. 2001). “Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 153.135. Robin argues that the evidence adduced at the modification hearing is factually insufficient to support the trial court’s conclusion that there has been no material or substantial change in circumstances relevant to the issue of possession.”
Burney v. Burney, 225 S.W.3d 208 (Tex. App. 2006). “Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 153.135. The standard possession order provided by Sub-chapter F constitutes a presumptive minimum amount of time for possession of a child by a parent named as a joint managing conservator who is not awarded the primary physical residence of the child in a…”
Albrecht v. Albrecht, 974 S.W.2d 262 (Tex. App. 1998). “” Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 153.135 (Vernon 1996).”
Carson v. Hathaway, 997 S.W.2d 760 (Tex. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 153.135. More importantly to this discussion, the appointment of joint managing conservators "does not impair or limit the authority of the court to order a joint managing conservator to pay child support to another joint managing conservator.”
In the Interest of S.C.T. v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2025). · cites it 3× “(Tex. Fam. Code §153.135) On January 30, 2023, Father filed Counter-Petitioner’s Objection to Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.”
in the Interest of Z.K.S., a Child (Tex. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “Nevertheless, it concluded that the trial court’s possession order impermissibly contravened the jury’s finding that the father should have the right to establish the child’s primary residence because the order effectively established two primary residences for the child.”
Eric J. Romero, ph.D. v. Odra Julieta Zapien A/K/A Odra J. Tort (Tex. App. 2010). · cites it 3× “Specifically, appellant argues that the trial court's decision to allow appellee to maintain physical possession of the child while allowing appellant visitation is not in the best interest of the child and is unconstitutional. Appellee asserts that section 153.”
in the Matter of the Marriage of Jeffery Dwight Marris & Kara Jane Mullins Marris & in the Interest of Kaitlyn Mullins, a Child (Tex. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 153.135 (Vernon 2002).”
Orlando Marquez v. Cynthia Cantu (Tex. App. 2018). “The Texas Family Code, however, specifically provides that “[j]oint managing conservatorship does not require the award of equal or nearly equal periods of physical possession of and access to the child to each of the joint conservators,” Tex. Fam. Code § 153.135, and that the…”
Show all 20 citing cases →
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.