Tex. Codes » Finance Code · TITLE 4. REGULATION OF INTEREST, LOANS, AND FINANCED TRANSACTIONS · SUBTITLE A. INTEREST · CHAPTER 304. JUDGMENT INTEREST
Texas Codes

Tex. Fin. Code § 304.003 (2026)

Judgment Interest Rate: Interest Rate Or Time Price Differential Not In Contract

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

Sec. 304.003. JUDGMENT INTEREST RATE: INTEREST RATE OR TIME PRICE DIFFERENTIAL NOT IN CONTRACT. (a) A money judgment of a court of this state to which Section 304.002 does not apply, including court costs awarded in the judgment and prejudgment interest, if any, earns postjudgment interest at the rate determined under this section.

(b) On the 15th day of each month, the consumer credit commissioner shall determine the postjudgment interest rate to be applied to a money judgment rendered during the succeeding calendar month.

(c) The postjudgment interest rate is:

(1) the prime rate as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System on the date of computation;

(2) five percent a year if the prime rate as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System described by Subdivision (1) is less than five percent; or

(3) 15 percent a year if the prime rate as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System described by Subdivision (1) is more than 15 percent.

Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 62, Sec. 7.18(a), eff. Sept. 1, 1999; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 204, Sec. 6.01, eff. Sept. 1, 2003; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 676, Sec. 1, eff. June 20, 2003.

Amended by:

Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 387 (S.B. 1450), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2005.

Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 1018 (H.B. 955), Sec. 7.01, eff. September 1, 2005.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 232 cases (60 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: Burke v. Union Pac. Resources Co., 138 S.W.3d 46 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Burke v. Union Pac. Resources Co., 138 S.W.3d 46 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2004). · cites it 8× “UPRC *74 argues that the new version of Tex. Fin. Code Ann. § 304.003 (c) applies because this Court’s opinion constitutes a judgment and the new provision applies to a judgment which will be “signed or subject to appeal.”
Columbia Med. Ctr. of Las Colinas, Inc. v. Hogue, 271 S.W.3d 238 (Tex. 2008). · cites it 4× “" House Bills 2415 and 4 lowered the floor interest rate to five percent from ten percent, and the ceiling interest rate to fifteen percent from twenty percent in subsections (c)(2) and (c)(3), respectively, of Texas Finance Code § 304.”
Springs Window Fashions Div., Inc. v. Blind Maker, Inc., 184 S.W.3d 840 (Tex. App.—Austin 2006). · cites it 3× “Laws 2096 , 2097 (effective June 20, 2003) (codified at Tex. Fin. Code Ann. § 304.003 (c) (West Supp.”
Columbia Med. Ctr. of Las Colinas v. Bush ex rel. Bush, 122 S.W.3d 835 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2003). · cites it 2× “” Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 304.003 (Vernon Supp.”
Keith v. Keith, 221 S.W.3d 156 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006). · cites it 2× “TEX. FIN.CODE ANN. § 304.003(c) (Vernon 2005).”
Samson Lone Star v. Hooks, 389 S.W.3d 409 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012). · cites it 4× “The supplemental issue, as phrased by Samson, is as follows: “Should the post judgment interest rate be 5% as set by Texas Finance Code § 304.003, rather than the rate of 18% as stated in the Final Judgment?” In its supplemental briefing and in its motion for rehearing filed on…”
Warrantech Corp. v. Comput. Adapters Servs., Inc., 134 S.W.3d 516 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2004). · cites it 3× “In June 2003,- the legislature amended Texas Finance Code section 304.003 to reduce the postjudgment interest rate from 10% to 5% per year “if the prime rate as published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York [on the date of computation] is less than five percent.”
HCRA of Texas, Inc. v. Johnston, 178 S.W.3d 861 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005). · cites it 2× “Laws 2096 , 2097 (effective date June 20, 2003) (amending Tex Fin.Code Ann. § 304.003(c) (Vernon Supp.”
Tribble & Stephens Co. v. RGM Constructors, L.P., 154 S.W.3d 639 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2005). · cites it 2× “Laws 2096 , 2096-97 (amended 2003) (current version at Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 304.003(c) (Vernon Supp.”
Dal-Chrome Co. v. Brenntag Sw., Inc., 183 S.W.3d 133 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006). · cites it 2× “Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 304.003 (Vernon Supp.”
Playboy Enter., Inc. v. Editorial Caballero, S.A. De C.V., 202 S.W.3d 250 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2006). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 304.003(c) (Vernon Supp.”
Durham Transp. Co. v. Beettner, 201 S.W.3d 859 (Tex. App.—Waco 2006). · cites it 3× “Laws 3091 , 3435 (amended 2003) (current version at Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 304.003(c) (Vernon Supp.”
Show all 232 citing cases →
Tex. Fin. Code § 304.003(a): 16 cases
Shook v. Walden, 304 S.W.3d 910 (Tex. App.—Austin 2010).
Dal-Chrome Co. v. Brenntag Sw., Inc., 183 S.W.3d 133 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006). “Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 304.003 (Vernon Supp.”
Long v. Castle Texas Prod. Ltd. P'ship, 426 S.W.3d 73 (Tex. 2014).
Dallas Cnty. v. Crestview Corners Car Wash, 370 S.W.3d 25 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012).
Meridien Hotels, Inc. v. LHO Fin. P'ship I, L.P., 255 S.W.3d 807 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2008).
Tex. Fin. Code § 304.003(b): 2 cases
Mid-Continent Cas. Co. v. Petroleum Solutions, Inc., 248 F. Supp. 3d 837 (S.D. Tex. 2017).
Aspen Specialty Ins. Co. v. Yin Investments USA, LP, No. 6:20-cv-00153 (E.D. Tex. July 7, 2022).
Tex. Fin. Code § 304.003(c): 54 cases
Burke v. Union Pac. Resources Co., 138 S.W.3d 46 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2004). “UPRC *74 argues that the new version of Tex. Fin. Code Ann. § 304.003 (c) applies because this Court’s opinion constitutes a judgment and the new provision applies to a judgment which will be “signed or subject to appeal.”
Keith v. Keith, 221 S.W.3d 156 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006). “TEX. FIN.CODE ANN. § 304.003(c) (Vernon 2005).”
HCRA of Texas, Inc. v. Johnston, 178 S.W.3d 861 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005). “Laws 2096 , 2097 (effective date June 20, 2003) (amending Tex Fin.Code Ann. § 304.003(c) (Vernon Supp.”
Tribble & Stephens Co. v. RGM Constructors, L.P., 154 S.W.3d 639 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2005). “Laws 2096 , 2096-97 (amended 2003) (current version at Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 304.003(c) (Vernon Supp.”
Playboy Enter., Inc. v. Editorial Caballero, S.A. De C.V., 202 S.W.3d 250 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2006). “See Tex. Fin.Code Ann. § 304.003(c) (Vernon Supp.”
Tex. Fin. Code § 304.003(c)(1): 8 cases
Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. v. Cowin (In re Cowin), 492 B.R. 858 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2013).
Shenzen Synergy Digit. Co. v. Mingtel, Inc., No. 4:19-cv-00216 (E.D. Tex. June 22, 2022).
Craig v. Gacp II LP, No. 3:19-cv-00058, 2022 WL 1778392 (N.D. Tex. June 1, 2022).
Jager Grp. LLC, No. 3:22-cv-02496 (N.D. Tex. Apr. 5, 2023).
EHO360 LLC v. Opalich, No. 3:21-cv-00724 (N.D. Tex. June 13, 2023).
Tex. Fin. Code § 304.003(c)(1)(2): 1 case
Great Am. Ins. Co. v. Teel Mgmt. Grp., Inc., No. 6:22-cv-00257 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 9, 2023).
Tex. Fin. Code § 304.003(c)(2): 16 cases
Springs Window Fashions Div., Inc. v. Blind Maker, Inc., 184 S.W.3d 840 (Tex. App.—Austin 2006). “Laws 2096 , 2097 (effective June 20, 2003) (codified at Tex. Fin. Code Ann. § 304.003 (c) (West Supp.”
Hot-Hed, Inc. v. Safehouse Habitats (Scotland), Ltd., 333 S.W.3d 719 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011).
Warrantech Corp. v. Comput. Adapters Servs., Inc., 134 S.W.3d 516 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2004). “In June 2003,- the legislature amended Texas Finance Code section 304.003 to reduce the postjudgment interest rate from 10% to 5% per year “if the prime rate as published by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York [on the date of computation] is less than five percent.”
Bossier Chrysler-Dodge II, Inc. v. Riley, 221 S.W.3d 749 (Tex. App.—Waco 2007).
Alan Gordon v. Dennis Leasman, 365 S.W.3d 109 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011).
Tex. Fin. Code § 304.003(c)(L): 1 case
UniWell Labs., LLC v. Frain Indus. Inc, No. 4:21-cv-01292 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 1, 2024).
Tex. Fin. Code § 304.003(c)(l): 1 case
Arete Partners, L.P. v. Gunnerman, 643 F.3d 410 (5th Cir. 2011).
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.