Texas Codes
Tex. Fam. Code § 6.308 (2026)
Exercising Partial Jurisdiction
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 6.308. EXERCISING PARTIAL JURISDICTION. (a) A court in which a suit for dissolution of a marriage is filed may exercise its jurisdiction over those portions of the suit for which it has authority.
(b) The court's authority to resolve the issues in controversy between the parties may be restricted because the court lacks:
(1) the required personal jurisdiction over a nonresident party in a suit for dissolution of the marriage;
(2) the required jurisdiction under Chapter 152; or
(3) the required jurisdiction under Chapter 159.
Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997.
SUBCHAPTER E. FILING SUIT
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: Dawson-Austin v. Austin, 968 S.W.2d 319 (Tex. 1998).
Dawson-Austin v. Austin, 968 S.W.2d 319 (Tex. 1998). “See TEX. FAM.CODE § 6.308 (in a suit to dissolve a marriage, a court may exercise its jurisdiction "over those portions of the suit which it has authority.”
In re Dean, 393 S.W.3d 741 (Tex. 2012). “See Tex. Fam.Code § 6.308(a) (stating that a court “may” exercise jurisdiction over portions of a divorce action for which it has authority, not that it must); see also Boots, 6 S.”
Griffith v. Griffith, 341 S.W.3d 43 (Tex. App. 2011). “3 Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308 (West 2006). Thus, section 6.”
Seligman-Hargis v. Hargis, 186 S.W.3d 582 (Tex. App. 2006). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308 (Vernon 1998); see also Boots v.”
In the Interest of B.T.G., 494 S.W.3d 839 (Tex. App. 2016). “See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 6.308 (West 2006) (in suit for dissolution of marriage, court’s authority to resolve issues may be restricted by UCCJEA and UIFSA).”
In Re Brown, 203 S.W.3d 888 (Tex. App. 2006). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308(a), (b)(2); see also Seligman-Hargis v.”
Boots v. Lopez, 6 S.W.3d 292 (Tex. App. 1999). “See Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308(a) (Vernon 1998).”
in the Matter of the Marriage of G.S. & A.G., 555 S.W.3d 301 (Tex. App. 2018). “TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 6.308 (West 2006). –22– this collateral attack, Father was required to show the property division in the agreed final decree of divorce was void.”
In Re the Marriage of Lai, 333 S.W.3d 645 (Tex. App. 2009). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308. 4 . Lai testified that divorce was not possible in China without agreement between the parties.”
Diaz v. Diaz, 126 S.W.3d 705 (Tex. App. 2004). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308(b) (Vernon 1998); see Dawson-Austin v.”
Mason v. Mason, 321 S.W.3d 178 (Tex. App. 2010). “; see also Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308(a) (Vernon Supp.”
Emmanuel C. Okonkwo v. Chinelo Joan Okonkwo, 365 S.W.3d 801 (Tex. App. 2012). “207(d); see also Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308(a) (West 2006) (noting that a court in which a suit for dissolution of a marriage is filed “may” exercise its jurisdiction over those portions of the suit for which it has authority).”
— Tex. Fam. Code § 6.308(a) — 11 cases
In re Dean, 393 S.W.3d 741 (Tex. 2012). “See Tex. Fam.Code § 6.308(a) (stating that a court “may” exercise jurisdiction over portions of a divorce action for which it has authority, not that it must); see also Boots, 6 S.”
In Re Brown, 203 S.W.3d 888 (Tex. App. 2006). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308(a), (b)(2); see also Seligman-Hargis v.”
Boots v. Lopez, 6 S.W.3d 292 (Tex. App. 1999). “See Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308(a) (Vernon 1998).”
Mason v. Mason, 321 S.W.3d 178 (Tex. App. 2010). “; see also Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308(a) (Vernon Supp.”
Emmanuel C. Okonkwo v. Chinelo Joan Okonkwo, 365 S.W.3d 801 (Tex. App. 2012). “207(d); see also Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308(a) (West 2006) (noting that a court in which a suit for dissolution of a marriage is filed “may” exercise its jurisdiction over those portions of the suit for which it has authority).”
— Tex. Fam. Code § 6.308(b) — 2 cases
Diaz v. Diaz, 126 S.W.3d 705 (Tex. App. 2004). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 6.308(b) (Vernon 1998); see Dawson-Austin v.”
Ernest Theophilus Quimby IV v. Jessica Yvette Quimby (Tex. App. 2019).
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.