Texas Codes

Tex. Tax Code § 43.04 (2026)

Suit To Compel Compliance With Deadlines

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

Sec. 43.04. SUIT TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH DEADLINES. The governing body of a taxing unit may sue the chief appraiser or members of the appraisal review board, as applicable, for failure to comply with the deadlines imposed by Section 25.22(a), 26.01(a), or 41.12. If the court finds that the chief appraiser or appraisal review board failed to comply for good cause shown, the court shall enter an order fixing a reasonable deadline for compliance. If the court finds that the chief appraiser or appraisal review board failed to comply without good cause, the court shall enter an order requiring the chief appraiser or appraisal review board to comply with the deadline not later than the 10th day after the date the judgment is signed. In a suit brought under this section, the court may enter any other order the court considers necessary to ensure compliance with the court's deadline or the applicable statutory requirements. Failure to obey an order of the court is punishable as contempt.

Added by Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 312, Sec. 5, eff. June 7, 1985. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 796, Sec. 47, eff. Sept. 1, 1989.

Notes of Decisions
Reagan Nat'l Advert. of Austin, Inc. D/B/A Reagan Nat'l Advert. v. City of Austin, Texas & Marc A. Ott, Being Sued in His Off. Capacity, 498 S.W.3d 236 (Tex. App. 2016). “0052(a) ("the tenant may' appeal the judgment of the- justice court by filing with the justice court, not later than the fifth day after the date the judgment is signed, a pauper’s affidavit”) (emphasis added); Tex. Tax Code § 43.04 (“If the court finds that the chief appraiser…”
Sturgis Air One, L.L.C. v. Harris Cnty. Appraisal Dist., 351 S.W.3d 381 (Tex. App. 2011). “055 that requires an appraisal district to honor a request for interstate allocation when the taxpayer renders the property without regard to the statutory timetables.”
Sturgis Air One, L.L.C. v. Harris Cnty. Appraisal Dist. (Tex. App. 2011). “We find wholly inconsistent with that intent an interpretation of Section 21.055 that requires an appraisal district to honor a request for interstate allocation when the taxpayer renders the property without regard to the statutory timetables.”
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.