Texas Codes

Tex. Transp. Code § 524.032 (2026)

Hearing Date; Rescheduling

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

Sec. 524.032. HEARING DATE; RESCHEDULING. (a) A hearing requested under this subchapter shall be held not earlier than the 11th day after the date on which the person requesting the hearing is notified of the hearing unless the parties agree to waive this requirement. The hearing shall be held before the effective date of the suspension.

(b) A hearing shall be rescheduled if, before the fifth day before the date scheduled for the hearing, a request for a continuance from the person who requested the hearing is received by the State Office of Administrative Hearings. Unless both parties agree otherwise, the hearing shall be rescheduled for a date not earlier than the fifth day after the date the request for continuance is received.

(c) A person who requests a hearing under this chapter may obtain only one continuance under this section unless the person shows that a medical condition prevents the person from attending the rescheduled hearing, in which event one additional continuance may be granted for a period not to exceed 10 days.

(d) A request for a hearing stays suspension of a person's driver's license until the date of the final decision of the administrative law judge.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995. Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 444, Sec. 4, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.

Amended by:

Acts 2015, 84th Leg., R.S., Ch. 228 (H.B. 2154), Sec. 21, eff. September 1, 2016.

Acts 2023, 88th Leg., R.S., Ch. 766 (H.B. 4528), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2023.

Acts 2025, 89th Leg., R.S., Ch. 432 (H.B. 3146), Sec. 6, eff. September 1, 2025.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1997–2002 · leading case: Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Vela, 980 S.W.2d 672 (Tex. App. 1998).
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Vela, 980 S.W.2d 672 (Tex. App. 1998). · cites it 3× “See Tex. Transp. Code Ann. §§ 524.032 (b), (e), 524.”
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Sweeny, 97 S.W.3d 597 (Tex. App. 2002). · cites it 3× “(citing Tex. TRAnsp. Code Ann. §§ 524.032 (b), (c), 524.”
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Salas, 977 S.W.2d 845 (Tex. App. 1998). “In Guerra , we held that the interplay between Texas Transportation Code sections 524.032(a) 3 and 524.”
Branham v. Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf., 950 S.W.2d 717 (Tex. App. 1997). “See Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 524.032 (d) (Vernon Pamph.”
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Moore, 24 S.W.3d 593 (Tex. App. 2000). “See Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 524.032 . . 19 Tex.”
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Hugo Ernesto Lara (Tex. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 524.032 (b) (Vernon 1999); 1 Tex.”
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. David Fernandez (Tex. App. 2000). · cites it 3× “On appeal, the Department contends that the 11-day notice of hearing requirement in Texas Transportation Code section 524.032 is calculated from the date the notice is mailed and that notice was sufficient.”
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Albert Salas (Tex. App. 1998). “We further held that section 524.032(a) is directory, rather than mandatory, and that the hearing can be held beyond the forty days for good cause shown; however, failure to hold a hearing within forty days does not deprive the agency of jurisdiction.”
the Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Daniel A. Juarez (Tex. App. 1998). “Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 524.021 (a) (Vernon Pamph.”
— Tex. Transp. Code § 524.032(a) — 3 cases
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Vela, 980 S.W.2d 672 (Tex. App. 1998). “See Tex. Transp. Code Ann. §§ 524.032 (b), (e), 524.”
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Salas, 977 S.W.2d 845 (Tex. App. 1998). “In Guerra , we held that the interplay between Texas Transportation Code sections 524.032(a) 3 and 524.”
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Albert Salas (Tex. App. 1998). “We further held that section 524.032(a) is directory, rather than mandatory, and that the hearing can be held beyond the forty days for good cause shown; however, failure to hold a hearing within forty days does not deprive the agency of jurisdiction.”
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.