Sec. 61.062. JUDICIAL REVIEW. (a) A party who has exhausted the party's administrative remedies under this chapter, other than a motion for rehearing, may bring a suit to appeal the order.
(b) The suit must be filed not later than the 30th day after the date the final order is mailed.
(c) The commission and any other party to the proceeding before the commission must be made defendants in the suit.
(d) The suit must be brought in the county of the claimant's residence. If the claimant is not a resident of this state, the suit must be brought in the county in this state in which the employer has its principal place of business.
(e) An appeal under this subchapter is by trial de novo with the substantial evidence rule being the standard of review in the manner as applied to an appeal from a final decision under Subtitle A, Title 4.
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 269, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1993. Amended by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 76, Sec. 9.14(b), eff. Sept. 1, 1995.
Amended by:
Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 378 (S.B. 1408), Sec. 13, eff. September 1, 2005.
Notes of Decisions
Hull v. Davis, 211 S.W.3d 461 (Tex. App. 2006).
· cites it 4× “See TEX. LAB.CODE ANN. § 61.062 (requiring a claimant seeking judicial review of the TWC's preliminary wage determination order to name TWC and any other party proceeding before the TWC as defendants in the suit).”
New Boston Gen. Hosp., Inc. v. Texas Workforce Comm'n, 47 S.W.3d 34 (Tex. App. 2001).
· cites it 2× “Naples contend that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because as a matter of law the summary judgment evidence did not constitute substantial evidence to support the TWC Payday Law Decision.”
Tech USA, Inc. v. Evans, 592 F. Supp. 2d 852 (D. Maryland 2009).
“See Tex. Lab.Code § 61.062. There are no barriers to Mr.”
— Tex. Lab. Code § 61.062(a) — 3 cases
Hull v. Davis, 211 S.W.3d 461 (Tex. App. 2006).
“See TEX. LAB.CODE ANN. § 61.062 (requiring a claimant seeking judicial review of the TWC's preliminary wage determination order to name TWC and any other party proceeding before the TWC as defendants in the suit).”
— Tex. Lab. Code § 61.062(b) — 3 cases
— Tex. Lab. Code § 61.062(c) — 7 cases
— Tex. Lab. Code § 61.062(d) — 5 cases
Hays Cnty., Texas, Ruben Becerra, Debbie Ingalsbe, Michelle Cohen, Morgan Hammer, & Walt Smith, in Their Off. Capacities v. Leslie Carnes, Jim Camp, Cathy Ramsey, & Gabrielle Moore (Tex. App. 2025).
— Tex. Lab. Code § 61.062(e) — 4 cases
New Boston Gen. Hosp., Inc. v. Texas Workforce Comm'n, 47 S.W.3d 34 (Tex. App. 2001).
“Naples contend that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because as a matter of law the summary judgment evidence did not constitute substantial evidence to support the TWC Payday Law Decision.”
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.