Tex. Codes » Family Code · TITLE 5. THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP AND THE SUIT AFFECTING THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP · SUBTITLE E. PROTECTION OF THE CHILD · CHAPTER 263. REVIEW OF PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN UNDER CARE OF DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES
Texas Codes

Tex. Fam. Code § 263.304 (2026)

Initial Permanency Hearing; Time

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

Sec. 263.304. INITIAL PERMANENCY HEARING; TIME. (a) Not later than the 180th day after the date the court renders a temporary order appointing the department as temporary managing conservator of a child, the court shall hold a permanency hearing to review the status of, and permanency plan for, the child to ensure that a final order consistent with that permanency plan is rendered before the date for dismissal of the suit under this chapter.

(b) The court shall set a final hearing under this chapter on a date that allows the court to render a final order before the date for dismissal of the suit under this chapter. Any party to the suit or an attorney ad litem for the child may seek a writ of mandamus to compel the court to comply with the duties imposed by this subsection.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 20, Sec. 1, eff. April 20, 1995. Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 751, Sec. 113, eff. Sept. 1, 1995; Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 600, Sec. 14, eff. Jan. 1, 1998; Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 603, Sec. 9, eff. Jan. 1, 1998; Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1022, Sec. 87, eff. Jan. 1, 1998; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1090, Sec. 7, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1996–2026 · leading case: In Re Texas Dep't of Prot. & Regulatory Servs., 71 S.W.3d 446 (Tex. App. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Texas Dep't of Prot. & Regulatory Servs., 71 S.W.3d 446 (Tex. App. 2002). “” Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 263.304(b) (Vernon Supp.”
In Re Jeffries, 979 S.W.2d 429 (Tex. App. 1998). “Laws 3888 , 3929 (amended 1997) (current version at Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 263.304 (Vernon Supp.”
in the Interest of T.T.F., a Child, 331 S.W.3d 461 (Tex. App. 2010). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 263.304(b); E.D.L., 105 S.”
Ryder v. State, 917 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. App. 1996). “Tex.Fam.Code Ann. §§ 263.304, 263.305 (Vernon Supp.”
In the Interest of A.L.S., 74 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App. 2002). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 263.304 (Vernon Supp.”
in the Interest of N.V.D., a Child, 102 S.W.3d 268 (Tex. App. 2003). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 263.304(a) (Vernon 2002).”
In the Interest of C.G.B., A/K/A M.G.K., & J.R.B., A/K/A R.R.K., Child., 163 S.W.3d 805 (Tex. App. 2005). “See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. §§ 263.304, 263.305 (Vernon 2002).”
In Re Nvd, 102 S.W.3d 268 (Tex. App. 2003). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 263.304(a) (Vernon 2002).”
In Re Als, 74 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App. 2002). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 263.304 (Vernon Supp.”
In Re Cgb, 163 S.W.3d 805 (Tex. App. 2005). “See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. §§ 263.304, 263.305 (Vernon 2002).”
In Re Ttf, 331 S.W.3d 461 (Tex. App. 2010). “could have sought to enforce her procedural right to a timely status hearing, a timely initial permanency hearing, and timely subsequent permanency hearings by mandamus.”
In Re K.D.P.S. (Tex. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “3 Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 263.304 (b). In contrast, Section 263.”
Show all 16 citing cases →
— Tex. Fam. Code § 263.304(a) — 3 cases
in the Interest of N.V.D., a Child, 102 S.W.3d 268 (Tex. App. 2003). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 263.304(a) (Vernon 2002).”
In Re Nvd, 102 S.W.3d 268 (Tex. App. 2003). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 263.304(a) (Vernon 2002).”
In Re K.D.P.S. (Tex. App. 2013). “3 Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 263.304 (b). In contrast, Section 263.”
— Tex. Fam. Code § 263.304(b) — 3 cases
In Re Texas Dep't of Prot. & Regulatory Servs., 71 S.W.3d 446 (Tex. App. 2002). “” Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 263.304(b) (Vernon Supp.”
in the Interest of T.T.F., a Child, 331 S.W.3d 461 (Tex. App. 2010). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 263.304(b); E.D.L., 105 S.”
In Re Ttf, 331 S.W.3d 461 (Tex. App. 2010). “could have sought to enforce her procedural right to a timely status hearing, a timely initial permanency hearing, and timely subsequent permanency hearings by mandamus.”
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.