Tex. Codes » Property Code · TITLE 4. ACTIONS AND REMEDIES · CHAPTER 21. EMINENT DOMAIN
Texas Codes

Tex. Prop. Code § 21.047 (2026)

Assessment Of Costs And Fees

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 21.047. ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AND FEES. (a) Special commissioners may adjudge the costs of an eminent domain proceeding against any party. If the commissioners award greater damages than the condemnor offered to pay before the proceedings began or if the decision of the commissioners is appealed and a court awards greater damages than the commissioners awarded, the condemnor shall pay all costs. If the commissioners' award or the court's determination of the damages is less than or equal to the amount the condemnor offered before proceedings began, the property owner shall pay the costs.

(b) A condemnor shall pay the initial cost of serving a property owner with notice of a condemnation proceeding. If the property owner is ordered to pay the costs of the proceeding, the condemnor may recover the expense of notice from the property owner as part of the costs.

(c) Repealed by Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., Ch. 472 (S.B. 41), Sec. 5.01(i), eff. January 1, 2022.

(d) If a court hearing a suit under this chapter determines that a condemnor did not make a bona fide offer to acquire the property from the property owner voluntarily as required by Section 21.0113, the court shall abate the suit, order the condemnor to make a bona fide offer, and order the condemnor to pay:

(1) all costs as provided by Subsection (a); and

(2) any reasonable attorney's fees and other professional fees incurred by the property owner that are directly related to the violation.

Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 3506, ch. 576, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1984.

Amended by:

Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 81 (S.B. 18), Sec. 17, eff. September 1, 2011.

Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 81 (S.B. 18), Sec. 18, eff. September 1, 2011.

Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., Ch. 472 (S.B. 41), Sec. 5.01(i), eff. January 1, 2022.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1995–2021 · leading case: Doan v. Transcanada Keystone Pipeline, LP, 542 S.W.3d 794 (Tex. App. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Doan v. Transcanada Keystone Pipeline, LP, 542 S.W.3d 794 (Tex. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “Texas Property Code section 21.047 provides that if the "condemnor did not make a bona fide offer to acquire the property from the property owner voluntarily as required .”
Taub v. Aquila Sw. Pipeline Corp., 93 S.W.3d 451 (Tex. App. 2003). “See Tex. Prop.Code Ann. § 21.047(a) (Vernon 2000) (providing in part, if court’s determination of damages is less than or equal to amount condemnor offered before proceedings began, property owner shall pay costs).”
State v. Schmidt, 894 S.W.2d 543 (Tex. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “” Tex.Prop.Code Ann. § 21.047 (West 1984). 2 We see nothing ambiguous in the statutory text when construed in light of the statutory purpose indicated.”
In Re STATE of Texas, 85 S.W.3d 871 (Tex. App. 2002). “Tex. Prop.Code Ann. §§ 21.047, 21.048 (Vernon 2000).”
City of Rosenberg v. State, 477 S.W.3d 878 (Tex. App. 2015). “See Tex. Prop. Code Ann. § 21.047 (d) (West 2014).”
James A. Hopkins & Jean C. Hopkins v. State of Texas (Tex. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “Tex. Prop. Code Ann. § 21.047 (a) (West 2000).”
James A. Hopkins & Jean C. Hopkins v. State of Texas (Tex. App. 2006). · cites it 3× “Tex. Prop. Code Ann. § 21.047 (a) (West 2000).”
in Re Elec. Transmission Texas, LLC (Tex. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “TEX. PROP. CODE ANN. § 21.047. Wyatt offers no authority in support of its argument that this section vests the trial court with the jurisdiction and discretion to address the requirements of section 21.”
City of Rosenberg v. State (Tex. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “The Court incorrectly concluded that the abatement remedy set forth in Texas Property Code section 21.047(d) is the sole remedy for the failure of the State to follow the mandatory prerequisites of the condemnation procedure.”
Hidalgo Cnty. Water Improvement Dist. No. 3 v. Hidalgo Cnty. Irrigation Dist. No. 1 (Tex. App. 2021). “See TEX. PROP. CODE ANN. § 21.047(a). 8 condemnation proceedings protect a landowner’s constitutional right to “adequate compensation” for the taking of its property.”
in Re: The State of Texas (Tex. App. 2002). “Tex. Prop. Code Ann. §§ 21.047 , 21.048 (Vernon 2000).”
State of Texas v. Leon Schmidt, Tr. (Tex. App. 1995). “" Tex. Prop. Code Ann. § 21.047 (West 1984).”
— Tex. Prop. Code § 21.047(a) — 3 cases
Taub v. Aquila Sw. Pipeline Corp., 93 S.W.3d 451 (Tex. App. 2003). “See Tex. Prop.Code Ann. § 21.047(a) (Vernon 2000) (providing in part, if court’s determination of damages is less than or equal to amount condemnor offered before proceedings began, property owner shall pay costs).”
State v. Schmidt, 894 S.W.2d 543 (Tex. App. 1995). “” Tex.Prop.Code Ann. § 21.047 (West 1984). 2 We see nothing ambiguous in the statutory text when construed in light of the statutory purpose indicated.”
Hidalgo Cnty. Water Improvement Dist. No. 3 v. Hidalgo Cnty. Irrigation Dist. No. 1 (Tex. App. 2021). “See TEX. PROP. CODE ANN. § 21.047(a). 8 condemnation proceedings protect a landowner’s constitutional right to “adequate compensation” for the taking of its property.”
— Tex. Prop. Code § 21.047(d) — 3 cases
Doan v. Transcanada Keystone Pipeline, LP, 542 S.W.3d 794 (Tex. App. 2018). “Texas Property Code section 21.047 provides that if the "condemnor did not make a bona fide offer to acquire the property from the property owner voluntarily as required .”
City of Rosenberg v. State (Tex. App. 2015). “The Court incorrectly concluded that the abatement remedy set forth in Texas Property Code section 21.047(d) is the sole remedy for the failure of the State to follow the mandatory prerequisites of the condemnation procedure.”
in Re Elec. Transmission Texas, LLC (Tex. App. 2015). “TEX. PROP. CODE ANN. § 21.047. Wyatt offers no authority in support of its argument that this section vests the trial court with the jurisdiction and discretion to address the requirements of section 21.”
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.