Texas Codes
Tex. Prop. Code § 13.001 (2026)
Validity Of Unrecorded Instrument
✓ laws through the 89th Legislature (2025)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 13.001. VALIDITY OF UNRECORDED INSTRUMENT. (a) A conveyance of real property or an interest in real property or a mortgage or deed of trust is void as to a creditor or to a subsequent purchaser for a valuable consideration without notice unless the instrument has been acknowledged, sworn to, or proved and filed for record as required by law.
(b) The unrecorded instrument is binding on a party to the instrument, on the party's heirs, and on a subsequent purchaser who does not pay a valuable consideration or who has notice of the instrument.
(c) This section does not apply to a financing statement, a security agreement filed as a financing statement, or a continuation statement filed for record under the Business & Commerce Code.
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3495, ch. 576, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 162, Sec. 4, eff. Sept. 1, 1989.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 161
cases (25 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case: Ron Sommers v. Sandcastle Homes, Inc., 521 S.W.3d 749 (Tex. 2017).
Ron Sommers v. Sandcastle Homes, Inc., 521 S.W.3d 749 (Tex. 2017). “It states to the contrary in subsection (f)(2) that after a court takes the affirmative step of expunging a notice of lis pendens, the recording of that order protects purchasers like Sandcastle and NewBiss “regardless of whether the purchaser or lender knew of the lis pendens…”
Hahn v. Love, 321 S.W.3d 517 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009). “See Tex Prop.Code Ann. § 13.001 (Vernon 2004).”
Realty Portfolio, Inc. v. Hamilton, 125 F.3d 292 (5th Cir. 1997). “See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. § 13.001 (a). Under section 544, the actual knowledge of the trustee is not relevant.”
Green v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 937 F. Supp. 2d 849 (N.D. Tex. 2013). “Texas Property Code § 13.001 thus remains in full force and continues to provide that an assignment binds the parties to the assignment, whether or not it is recorded.”
Noble Mortg. & Investments, LLC v. D & M Vision Investments, LLC, 340 S.W.3d 65 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011). “[[Image here]] Tex. Prop.Code Ann. § 13.001 (a)-(b) (Vernon 2004).”
Jones v. Smith, 291 S.W.3d 549 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2009). “See Tex. Prop.Code Ann. § 13.001(b) (Vernon 2004) (“The unrecorded instrument is binding on a party to the instrument, on the party’s heirs, and on a subsequent purchaser who does not pay a valuable consideration or who has notice of the instrument.”
Texas Dep't of Transp. & City of Edinburg v. A.P.I. Pipe & Supply, L.L.C., 397 S.W.3d 162 (Tex. 2013). “Tex. Prop.Code § 13.001(a). . API does not argue, and we do not consider, whether the 2004 Judgment is a "correction instrument” under recently enacted sections 5.”
Omohundro v. Jackson, 36 S.W.3d 677 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2001). “The trial court rendered judgment in favor of Jackson and entered findings of fact and conclusions of law, stating that: (1) Mercantile Bank was a “creditor” as that term is defined in Texas Property Code Section 13.001; (2) Mercantile Bank’s recorded deed of trust was superior…”
Dallas Cnty. v. MERSCORP, Incorpora, 791 F.3d 545 (5th Cir. 2015). “See Tex. Prop.Code Ann. §§ 13.001(a), 13.002.”
Sun Expl. & Prod. Co. v. Benton, 728 S.W.2d 35 (Tex. 1987). “See TEX.PROP. CODE ANN. § 13.001(b) (Vernon 1984).”
Day & Co. v. Texland Petroleum, Inc., 718 S.W.2d 384 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1986). “Therefore, they say, being unrecorded, and thus, they reason, void as to appellants, the ratification did not cut off Day & Co.”
Mullane v. Chambers, 333 F.3d 322 (1st Cir. 2003). “552, 554-55 (Bankr.M.D.Tenn.1995) (construing Tenn.”
Tex. Prop. Code § 13.001(A): 1 case
David Young v. Trails End Homeowners Ass'n, No. 03-14-00535-CV (Tex. App.—Austin May 22, 2015).
Tex. Prop. Code § 13.001(a): 64 cases
Ron Sommers v. Sandcastle Homes, Inc., 521 S.W.3d 749 (Tex. 2017). “It states to the contrary in subsection (f)(2) that after a court takes the affirmative step of expunging a notice of lis pendens, the recording of that order protects purchasers like Sandcastle and NewBiss “regardless of whether the purchaser or lender knew of the lis pendens…”
Hahn v. Love, 321 S.W.3d 517 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009). “See Tex Prop.Code Ann. § 13.001 (Vernon 2004).”
Realty Portfolio, Inc. v. Hamilton, 125 F.3d 292 (5th Cir. 1997). “See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. § 13.001 (a). Under section 544, the actual knowledge of the trustee is not relevant.”
Texas Dep't of Transp. & City of Edinburg v. A.P.I. Pipe & Supply, L.L.C., 397 S.W.3d 162 (Tex. 2013). “Tex. Prop.Code § 13.001(a). . API does not argue, and we do not consider, whether the 2004 Judgment is a "correction instrument” under recently enacted sections 5.”
Dallas Cnty. v. MERSCORP, Incorpora, 791 F.3d 545 (5th Cir. 2015). “See Tex. Prop.Code Ann. §§ 13.001(a), 13.002.”
Tex. Prop. Code § 13.001(b): 23 cases
Green v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 937 F. Supp. 2d 849 (N.D. Tex. 2013). “Texas Property Code § 13.001 thus remains in full force and continues to provide that an assignment binds the parties to the assignment, whether or not it is recorded.”
Jones v. Smith, 291 S.W.3d 549 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2009). “See Tex. Prop.Code Ann. § 13.001(b) (Vernon 2004) (“The unrecorded instrument is binding on a party to the instrument, on the party’s heirs, and on a subsequent purchaser who does not pay a valuable consideration or who has notice of the instrument.”
Sun Expl. & Prod. Co. v. Benton, 728 S.W.2d 35 (Tex. 1987). “See TEX.PROP. CODE ANN. § 13.001(b) (Vernon 1984).”
Dallas Cnty. v. MERSCORP, Inc., 2 F. Supp. 3d 938 (N.D. Tex. 2014).
Noell v. Crow-Billingsley Air Park Ltd. P'ship, 233 S.W.3d 408 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2007).
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.