Texas Codes

Tex. Transp. Code § 501.071 (2026)

Sale Of Vehicle; Transfer Of Title

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

Sec. 501.071. SALE OF VEHICLE; TRANSFER OF TITLE. (a) Except as provided by Sections 503.036 and 503.039, a motor vehicle may not be the subject of a subsequent sale unless the owner designated on the title submits a transfer of ownership of the title.

(b) The transfer of the title must be in a manner prescribed by the department that:

(1) certifies the purchaser is the owner of the vehicle; and

(2) certifies there are no liens on the vehicle or provides a release of each lien on the vehicle.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

Amended by:

Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 1127 (H.B. 2495), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2005.

Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1296 (H.B. 2357), Sec. 32, eff. January 1, 2012.

Acts 2017, 85th Leg., R.S., Ch. 969 (S.B. 2076), Sec. 14, eff. September 1, 2017.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1997–2024 · leading case: First Nat. Bank of El Campo v. Buss, 143 S.W.3d 915 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2004).
First Nat. Bank of El Campo v. Buss, 143 S.W.3d 915 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2004). · cites it 3× “Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 501.071 (Vernon 1999).”
Lundy v. First Nat'l Bank (In re Dota), 288 B.R. 448 (S.D. Tex. 2003). · cites it 5× “Tex. Trans. Code § 501.071. Lundy argues that because Dota was a “dealer” and not an “owner” as those terms are defined by § 501.”
Comerica Acceptance Corp. v. Dallas Cent. Appraisal Dist., 52 S.W.3d 495 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2001). · cites it 2× “2001); Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 501.071 (Vernon 1999).”
Vibbert v. Par, Inc., 224 S.W.3d 317 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2006). “But the Act additionally provides that Chapters 1 through 9 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code control over a conflicting provision of Chapter 501.”
Arcadia Fin., Ltd. v. Sw.-Tex Leasing Co., 78 S.W.3d 619 (Tex. App.—Austin 2002). “” Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 501.071 (a) (West 1999); see also id.”
Albert Lujan v. Navistar, Inc., 503 S.W.3d 424 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2016). “See Tex. Transp. Code §§ 501.071(a) (“[A] motor vehicle may not be the subject of a subsequent sale unless the owner designated on the title submits a transfer of 23 ownership of the title.”
Tyler Car & Truck Ctr. v. Empire Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 2 S.W.3d 482 (Tex. App.—Tyler 1999). “Tex. TRAnsp. Code Ann. § 501.071 (Vernon 1997).”
Gourrier v. Joe Myers Motors, Inc., 115 S.W.3d 570 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2002). “6687-1, §§ 33 & 53, repealed and codified at Tex. Trans. Code §§ 501.071 & 501.073). Non-compliance does not affect a sale “as between the parties, when the purposes of the Certificate of Title Act are not defeated.”
Bank One Texas N.A. v. Arcadia Fin. Ltd., 219 F.3d 494 (5th Cir. 2000). “2 Bank One argues that, as between Arcadia and Bank One, the consumers were not buyers in the ordinary course of business because a valid sale never took place under the Texas Certificate of Title Act.”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Scott, 866 F. Supp. 2d 680 (S.D. Tex. 2012). “Tex. Transp. Code § 501.071. The Title Act dictates the correct form of title and voids sales with defective certificates of title.”
Gourrier v. Joe Myers Motors, Inc., 78 S.W.3d 651 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2002). “6687-1, §§ 33 & 53, repealed and codified at Tex. Trans. Code §§ 501.071 & 501.073). Non-compliance does not affect a sale “as between the parties, when the purposes of the Certificate of Title Act are not defeated.”
Dockside Marine, L.L.C. v. Joshua Walker, No. 09-23-00047-CV (Tex. App.—Beaumont June 27, 2024). · cites it 2× “” See Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 501.071 . Even so, the Water Safety Act covers watercraft MSOs, and “[t]here is no indication that the legislature intended the automobile Certificate of Title Act to apply to boat and outboard motor transactions.”
Tex. Transp. Code § 501.071(a): 5 cases
Lundy v. First Nat'l Bank (In re Dota), 288 B.R. 448 (S.D. Tex. 2003). “Tex. Trans. Code § 501.071. Lundy argues that because Dota was a “dealer” and not an “owner” as those terms are defined by § 501.”
Vibbert v. Par, Inc., 224 S.W.3d 317 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2006). “But the Act additionally provides that Chapters 1 through 9 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code control over a conflicting provision of Chapter 501.”
Albert Lujan v. Navistar, Inc., 503 S.W.3d 424 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2016). “See Tex. Transp. Code §§ 501.071(a) (“[A] motor vehicle may not be the subject of a subsequent sale unless the owner designated on the title submits a transfer of 23 ownership of the title.”
Mary Sue Sauceda v. Quality Motors, No. 10-19-00422-CV (Tex. App.—Waco Aug. 25, 2021).
Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Repub. Nat'l Bank, No. 01-03-01356-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Jan. 13, 2005).
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.