Tex. Codes » Family Code · TITLE 1. THE MARRIAGE RELATIONSHIP · SUBTITLE C. DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE · CHAPTER 9. POST-DECREE PROCEEDINGS
Texas Codes

Tex. Fam. Code § 9.007 (2026)

Limitation On Power Of Court To Enforce

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

Sec. 9.007. LIMITATION ON POWER OF COURT TO ENFORCE. (a) A court may not amend, modify, alter, or change the division of property made or approved in the decree of divorce or annulment. An order to enforce the division is limited to an order to assist in the implementation of or to clarify the prior order and may not alter or change the substantive division of property.

(b) An order under this section that amends, modifies, alters, or changes the actual, substantive division of property made or approved in a final decree of divorce or annulment is beyond the power of the divorce court and is unenforceable.

(c) The trial court may not render an order to assist in the implementation of or to clarify the property division made or approved in the decree before the 30th day after the date the final judgment is signed. If a timely motion for new trial or to vacate, modify, correct, or reform the decree is filed, the trial court may not render an order to assist in the implementation of or to clarify the property division made or approved in the decree before the 30th day after the date the order overruling the motion is signed or the motion is overruled by operation of law.

Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, Sec. 1, eff. April 17, 1997.

Amended by:

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 421 (S.B. 1237), Sec. 3, eff. September 1, 2017.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 189 cases (38 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: Gainous v. Gainous, 219 S.W.3d 97 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gainous v. Gainous, 219 S.W.3d 97 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006). · cites it 10× “") (quoting TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 9.007(a)); In re Marriage of Jones, 154 S.”
Reiss v. Reiss, 118 S.W.3d 439 (Tex. 2003). · cites it 4× “See Tex. Fam.Code § 9.007. Accordingly, the appellate court correctly found that the district court erred by awarding Gloria a fifty percent interest in the entirety of Edwin's retirement benefits.”
Hagen v. Hagen, 282 S.W.3d 899 (Tex. 2009). · cites it 4× “3d at 442 (holding that a trial court's correct construction of a divorce decree's award "does not impermissibly `amend, modify, alter, or change the division of property made or approved in the decree of divorce'" (quoting TEX. FAM. CODE § 9.007(a))). III. The Decree in…”
In re W.L.W., 370 S.W.3d 799 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2012). · cites it 9× “Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 9.007 (a), (b) (West 2006).”
Sheikh v. Sheikh, 248 S.W.3d 381 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007). · cites it 5× “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 9.007(c) (Vernon 2006) (“The power of the court to render further orders to assist in the implementation of or to clarify the property division is abated while an appellate proceeding is pending.”
Provine v. Provine, 312 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009). · cites it 4× “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 9.007 (Vernon 2006); In re Garza, 153 S.”
William Perry v. Vickie Reams Perry, 512 S.W.3d 523 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2016). · cites it 3× “Tex. Fam. Code § 9.007(a). William contends that the trial court improperly modified the division of property made in William and Vickie’s decree of divorce.”
Baker v. Donovan, 199 S.W.3d 577 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006). · cites it 8× “TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 9.007(b) (Vernon 2003).”
DeGroot v. DeGroot, 260 S.W.3d 658 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008). · cites it 3× “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 9.007 (Vernon 2006); Harleaux, 154 S.”
Michael S. Land v. Stephanie Anne Land, 561 S.W.3d 624 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2018). · cites it 3× “Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 9.007 (a) (Vernon Supp.”
English v. English, 44 S.W.3d 102 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2001). · cites it 3× “Eula counters that Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 9.007(c) prohibits the trial judge from rendering further orders to assist implementation of or to clarify the property division.”
Stacey Everett v. Jamie Everett, 421 S.W.3d 918 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2014). · cites it 5× “Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 9.007 (West 2006); Tex.”
Show all 189 citing cases →
Tex. Fam. Code § 9.007(a): 78 cases
Hagen v. Hagen, 282 S.W.3d 899 (Tex. 2009). “3d at 442 (holding that a trial court's correct construction of a divorce decree's award "does not impermissibly `amend, modify, alter, or change the division of property made or approved in the decree of divorce'" (quoting TEX. FAM. CODE § 9.007(a))). III. The Decree in…”
Gainous v. Gainous, 219 S.W.3d 97 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006). “") (quoting TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 9.007(a)); In re Marriage of Jones, 154 S.”
Reiss v. Reiss, 118 S.W.3d 439 (Tex. 2003). “See Tex. Fam.Code § 9.007. Accordingly, the appellate court correctly found that the district court erred by awarding Gloria a fifty percent interest in the entirety of Edwin's retirement benefits.”
William Perry v. Vickie Reams Perry, 512 S.W.3d 523 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2016). “Tex. Fam. Code § 9.007(a). William contends that the trial court improperly modified the division of property made in William and Vickie’s decree of divorce.”
Provine v. Provine, 312 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 9.007 (Vernon 2006); In re Garza, 153 S.”
Tex. Fam. Code § 9.007(b): 39 cases
Gainous v. Gainous, 219 S.W.3d 97 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006). “") (quoting TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 9.007(a)); In re Marriage of Jones, 154 S.”
Baker v. Donovan, 199 S.W.3d 577 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006). “TEX. FAM.CODE ANN. § 9.007(b) (Vernon 2003).”
William Perry v. Vickie Reams Perry, 512 S.W.3d 523 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2016). “Tex. Fam. Code § 9.007(a). William contends that the trial court improperly modified the division of property made in William and Vickie’s decree of divorce.”
Joyner v. Joyner, 352 S.W.3d 746 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2011).
in the Interest of N.T.P. & L.C.P., Child., 402 S.W.3d 13 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2012).
Tex. Fam. Code § 9.007(c): 7 cases
Sheikh v. Sheikh, 248 S.W.3d 381 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007). “See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 9.007(c) (Vernon 2006) (“The power of the court to render further orders to assist in the implementation of or to clarify the property division is abated while an appellate proceeding is pending.”
English v. English, 44 S.W.3d 102 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2001). “Eula counters that Tex.Fam.Code Ann. § 9.007(c) prohibits the trial judge from rendering further orders to assist implementation of or to clarify the property division.”
In re Miller, 433 S.W.3d 82 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014).
In re Fischer-Stoker, 174 S.W.3d 268 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2005).
In re Marvin Laverl Edwards, No. 06-12-00037-CV (Tex. App.—Texarkana Apr. 25, 2012).
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.