Texas Codes

Tex. Occ. Code § 2301.805 (2026)

Relief Under Other Law

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 2301.805. RELIEF UNDER OTHER LAW. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, including Subchapter E, Chapter 17, Business & Commerce Code, in addition to the other remedies provided by this subchapter, a person may institute an action under Subchapter E, Chapter 17, Business & Commerce Code, or any successor statute to that subchapter, and is entitled to any procedure or remedy under that subchapter, if the person:

(1) has sustained damages as a result of a violation of Sections 2301.351-2301.354 or Section 2301.357; or

(2) is a franchised dealer who has sustained damages as a result of a violation of:

(A) Subchapter J of this chapter; or

(B) Subchapter E, Chapter 17, Business & Commerce Code.

(b) In an action brought under this section, and in the interest of judicial economy and efficiency, a judgment entered in the action must give deference to the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the board contained in any final order that is the basis of the action.

(c) In an action brought against a license holder under this section, or for any other type of conduct for which an action may be brought under Subchapter E, Chapter 17, Business & Commerce Code, the $1,000 limitation contained in Section 17.50(b)(1), Business & Commerce Code, as that provision existed on September 1, 1979, shall be adjusted to reflect a change in the consumer price index after that date. The limitation shall be increased or decreased, as applicable, by an amount equal to 1,000 multiplied by the percentage of increase or decrease in the consumer price index between September 1, 1979, and the time the damages are awarded by final judgment or settlement. In this subsection, "consumer price index" means the National Consumer Price Index For All Urban Consumers, or a substantially similar successor. A court may take judicial notice of that index.

Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1421, Sec. 5, eff. June 1, 2003.

Amended by:

Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 137 (S.B. 529), Sec. 15, eff. September 1, 2011.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2005–2023 · leading case: Autobahn Imports, L.P. v. Jaguar Land Rover N. Am., L.L.C., 896 F.3d 340 (5th Cir. 2018).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Autobahn Imports, L.P. v. Jaguar Land Rover N. Am., L.L.C., 896 F.3d 340 (5th Cir. 2018). “" TEX. OCC. CODE § 2301.805(b). These dueling interpretations turn on a recurring source of uncertainty in statutory interpretation: To whom is the statute addressed? Subaru tacitly embraces Jaguar's narrowing construction, and Autobahn offers nothing on appeal to show that that…”

Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc. v. Marathon Coach, Inc., 320 S.W.3d 912 (Tex. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “We conclude, for at least two reasons, that the Division did not err in determining that it possessed exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether Marathon had violated the vertical-integration prohibition. First, Buddy Gregg purports to assert at least one “Code-based claim”…”

Star Houston, Inc.// Cross-Appellant,Volvo Cars of North Am., LLC N/K/A Volvo Car USA, LLC v. Volvo Cars of North Am., LLC N/K/A Volvo Car USA, LLC, & Bd. of the Texas Dep't of Motor Vehs.// Star Houston, Inc., & Bd. of the Texas Dep't of Motor Vehs. (Tex. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “10 Tex. Occ. Code § 2301.805(a)(2)(A). In such suits, the statute provides, courts must “give deference to the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the board contained in any final order that is the basis of the action.”

Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc. v. Marathon Coach, Inc. Brett Bray L. David Brunke & Motor Veh. Div. of the Texas Dep't of Transp. (Tex. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Occ. Code Ann. § 2301.805 ; see also Subaru, 84 S.”

Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc. v. Marathon Coach, Inc. Brett Bray L. David Brunke & Motor Veh. Div. of the Texas Dep't of Transp. (Tex. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “First, Buddy Gregg purports to assert at least one "Code-based claim" predicated on Marathon's alleged violation of the vertical-integration prohibition--a cause of action for DTPA relief under occupations code section 2301.”

Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc.//Cross-Appellant, Liberty Coach, Inc. v. Motor Veh. Bd. of the Texas Dep't of Transp. & Liberty Coach, Inc.//Cross-Appellee, Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc. (Tex. App. 2005). “3d at 223 ; see also Tex. Occ. Code Ann. § 2301.805 . The Board's decision regarding alleged violations of the motor vehicle code is reviewed under a substantial-evidence standard.”

Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc.//Cross-Appellant, Liberty Coach, Inc. v. Motor Veh. Bd. of the Texas Dep't of Transp. & Liberty Coach, Inc.//Cross-Appellee, Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc. (Tex. App. 2005). “3d at 223 ; see also Tex. Occ. Code Ann. § 2301.805 . The Board’s decision regarding alleged violations of the motor vehicle code is reviewed under a substantial-evidence standard.”

— Tex. Occ. Code § 2301.805(a)(2)(A) — 1 case

Star Houston, Inc.// Cross-Appellant,Volvo Cars of North Am., LLC N/K/A Volvo Car USA, LLC v. Volvo Cars of North Am., LLC N/K/A Volvo Car USA, LLC, & Bd. of the Texas Dep't of Motor Vehs.// Star Houston, Inc., & Bd. of the Texas Dep't of Motor Vehs. (Tex. App. 2023). “10 Tex. Occ. Code § 2301.805(a)(2)(A). In such suits, the statute provides, courts must “give deference to the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the board contained in any final order that is the basis of the action.”

— Tex. Occ. Code § 2301.805(b) — 3 cases

Star Houston, Inc.// Cross-Appellant,Volvo Cars of North Am., LLC N/K/A Volvo Car USA, LLC v. Volvo Cars of North Am., LLC N/K/A Volvo Car USA, LLC, & Bd. of the Texas Dep't of Motor Vehs.// Star Houston, Inc., & Bd. of the Texas Dep't of Motor Vehs. (Tex. App. 2023). “10 Tex. Occ. Code § 2301.805(a)(2)(A). In such suits, the statute provides, courts must “give deference to the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the board contained in any final order that is the basis of the action.”

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.