Tex. Codes » Family Code · TITLE 1. THE MARRIAGE RELATIONSHIP · SUBTITLE C. DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE · CHAPTER 8. MAINTENANCE
Texas Codes

Tex. Fam. Code § 8.054 (2026)

Duration Of Maintenance Order

✓ laws through the 89th Legislature (2025)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 8.054. DURATION OF MAINTENANCE ORDER. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a court:

(1) may not order maintenance that remains in effect for more than:

(A) five years after the date of the order, if:

(i) the spouses were married to each other for less than 10 years and the eligibility of the spouse for whom maintenance is ordered is established under Section 8.051(1); or

(ii) the spouses were married to each other for at least 10 years but not more than 20 years;

(B) seven years after the date of the order, if the spouses were married to each other for at least 20 years but not more than 30 years; or

(C) 10 years after the date of the order, if the spouses were married to each other for 30 years or more; and

(2) shall limit the duration of a maintenance order to the shortest reasonable period that allows the spouse seeking maintenance to earn sufficient income to provide for the spouse's minimum reasonable needs, unless the ability of the spouse to provide for the spouse's minimum reasonable needs is substantially or totally diminished because of:

(A) physical or mental disability of the spouse seeking maintenance;

(B) duties as the custodian of an infant or young child of the marriage; or

(C) another compelling impediment to earning sufficient income to provide for the spouse's minimum reasonable needs.

(b) The court may order maintenance for a spouse to whom Section 8.051(2)(A) or (C) applies for as long as the spouse continues to satisfy the eligibility criteria prescribed by the applicable provision.

(c) On the request of either party or on the court's own motion, the court may order the periodic review of its order for maintenance under Subsection (b).

(d) The continuation of maintenance ordered under Subsection (b) is subject to the procedural requirements for a motion to modify as provided by Section 8.057.

Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997. Renumbered from Sec. 8.005 and amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 807, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.

Amended by:

Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 914 (H.B. 201), Sec. 3, eff. September 1, 2005.

Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 486 (H.B. 901), Sec. 3, eff. September 1, 2011.

Acts 2023, 88th Leg., R.S., Ch. 443 (H.B. 2070), Sec. 1, eff. June 9, 2023.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 54 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 2002–2026 · leading case: Renee Sheree O'Carolan v. Gary D. Hopper, 414 S.W.3d 288 (Tex. App.—Austin 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Renee Sheree O'Carolan v. Gary D. Hopper, 414 S.W.3d 288 (Tex. App.—Austin 2013). · cites it 5× “See former Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 8.054. 20 He argues that continuation is available only when the court’s original order explicitly provides that maintenance will continue indefinitely.”
Hackenjos v. Hackenjos, 204 S.W.3d 906 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006). · cites it 6× “On December 18, 2005, the trial court issued its findings of fact and conclusions of law, which states only that the trial court finds and concludes that it lacks the authority to extend spousal maintenance under Texas Family Code section 8.”
Brooks v. Brooks, 257 S.W.3d 418 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2008). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 8.054(a)(1); In re Green, 221 S.”
Crane v. Crane, 188 S.W.3d 276 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2006). · cites it 4× “See Tex. Fam.Code ANN. § 8.054; Act of May 22, 2001, 77th Leg.”
Amos v. Amos, 79 S.W.3d 747 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2002). · cites it 2× “” TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 8.054 (Vernon Supp.”
Yarbrough v. Yarbrough, 151 S.W.3d 687 (Tex. App.—Waco 2004). · cites it 2× “See TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 8.054(a)(2) (Vernon Supp.”
Kenneth Ray Waldrop v. Teresa Waldrop, 552 S.W.3d 396 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2018). · cites it 2× “Laws 3146 , 3146 (amended 2011) (current version at Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 8.051 (West Supp. 2017)); Act of May 25, 2005, 79th Leg.”
Tellez v. Tellez, 345 S.W.3d 689 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011). · cites it 3× “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 8.054 (West 2006); Crane v.”
Roberts v. Roberts, 531 S.W.3d 224 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2017). “Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 8.054 . In the Remand Order, under the heading of “spousal maintenance”, the trial court stated its finding that “MARGARET D.”
Dunn v. Dunn, 177 S.W.3d 393 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2005). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 8.054(b) (Vernon Supp.”
Deltuva v. Deltuva, 113 S.W.3d 882 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 8.054 (Vernon Supp.2003).”
In re Lozano, 263 S.W.3d 87 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006). · cites it 4× “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 8.054. Here, pursuant to the temporary orders, Robert must pay Jody “as temporary spousal support $1,384 per month which is paid as a salary from the family owned business .”
Show all 54 citing cases →
Tex. Fam. Code § 8.054(1)(C): 1 case
David Begala v. Rebecca Begala, 722 S.W.3d 220 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2025).
Tex. Fam. Code § 8.054(a): 5 cases
Crane v. Crane, 188 S.W.3d 276 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2006). “See Tex. Fam.Code ANN. § 8.054; Act of May 22, 2001, 77th Leg.”
Hackenjos v. Hackenjos, 204 S.W.3d 906 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006). “On December 18, 2005, the trial court issued its findings of fact and conclusions of law, which states only that the trial court finds and concludes that it lacks the authority to extend spousal maintenance under Texas Family Code section 8.”
In re Lozano, 263 S.W.3d 87 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 8.054. Here, pursuant to the temporary orders, Robert must pay Jody “as temporary spousal support $1,384 per month which is paid as a salary from the family owned business .”
Heller v. Heller, 359 S.W.3d 902 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2012).
David Begala v. Rebecca Begala, 722 S.W.3d 220 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2025).
Tex. Fam. Code § 8.054(a)(1): 5 cases
Brooks v. Brooks, 257 S.W.3d 418 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2008). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 8.054(a)(1); In re Green, 221 S.”
Henry Hutcherson III v. Tina Hutcherson, No. 03-24-00297-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 19, 2026).
Mark Joseph Gordon v. Brenda Carol Gordon, No. 14-10-01031-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Nov. 29, 2011).
Linda Maria Turner v. Lewis Allen Turner, No. 11-10-00192-CV, 2012 WL 3115155 (Tex. App.—Eastland July 31, 2012).
Dustin McClain Smallridge v. Patricia Robin Smallridge, No. 11-10-00180-CV (Tex. App.—Eastland July 26, 2012).
Tex. Fam. Code § 8.054(a)(1)(A)(ii): 2 cases
Jennifer Anne Cannon-Hunter v. Bradford L. Hunter, No. 03-21-00332-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Feb. 16, 2023).
In the Matter of the Marriage of Nathan Levi Lavender & Candice Marie Lavender & in the Interest of H.L.L., J.G.L., & I.K.L., Child. v. the State of Texas, No. 06-22-00070-CV (Tex. App.—Texarkana May 10, 2023).
Tex. Fam. Code § 8.054(a)(1)(B): 1 case
Bart Debrock v. Marlies Debrock, No. 03-21-00308-CV, 2022 WL 17970214 (Tex. App.—Austin Dec. 28, 2022).
Tex. Fam. Code § 8.054(a)(2): 4 cases
Yarbrough v. Yarbrough, 151 S.W.3d 687 (Tex. App.—Waco 2004). “See TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 8.054(a)(2) (Vernon Supp.”
Odelia Laura Caudillo v. Daniel Caudillo, No. 07-19-00198-CV (Tex. App.—Amarillo Apr. 24, 2020).
Robert Douglas Rue v. Alicia McCullough Rue, No. 03-22-00758-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Oct. 6, 2023).
Henry Hutcherson III v. Tina Hutcherson, No. 03-24-00297-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 19, 2026).
Tex. Fam. Code § 8.054(b): 13 cases
Dunn v. Dunn, 177 S.W.3d 393 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2005). “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 8.054(b) (Vernon Supp.”
Brooks v. Brooks, 257 S.W.3d 418 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2008). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 8.054(a)(1); In re Green, 221 S.”
Hackenjos v. Hackenjos, 204 S.W.3d 906 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006). “On December 18, 2005, the trial court issued its findings of fact and conclusions of law, which states only that the trial court finds and concludes that it lacks the authority to extend spousal maintenance under Texas Family Code section 8.”
Renee Sheree O'Carolan v. Gary D. Hopper, 414 S.W.3d 288 (Tex. App.—Austin 2013). “See former Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 8.054. 20 He argues that continuation is available only when the court’s original order explicitly provides that maintenance will continue indefinitely.”
Smith v. Smith, 115 S.W.3d 303 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2003).
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.