What is Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166a?
Direct Answer:
Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166a governs summary judgment practice in Texas civil courts. It provides two main procedural vehicles: the traditional motion for summary judgment and the no-evidence motion for summary judgment. The rule was most recently amended by the Supreme Court of Texas effective March 1, 2026, primarily to modernize language and clarify deadlines while maintaining the substantive law of summary judgment.
Rule Summary (Post–2026 Version)
1. Purpose and Scope
Rule 166a authorizes courts to render summary judgment when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, such that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Tex. R. Civ. P. 166a
2. Types of Summary Judgment Motions
- Traditional Motion (Rule 166a(a)) – Available to a party who asserts that undisputed evidence proves its right to judgment as a matter of law on a claim or defense. The movant bears the burden to establish each element of its claim or to negate an element of the opposing party’s claim.
- No-Evidence Motion (Rule 166a(b)) – Permitted after adequate time for discovery; it allows a movant to challenge the nonmovant to produce summary judgment evidence raising a genuine issue of material fact on one or more elements of a claim or defense for which the nonmovant bears the burden of proof. If the nonmovant fails to raise such evidence, judgment must be granted.[1]
3. Timing and Filing
A traditional motion may be filed any time after the opposing party has appeared or answered, unless restricted by court order. A no-evidence motion may only be filed after an adequate opportunity for discovery.[1][3]
4. Court Procedure
The clerk must bring the motion to the court’s attention promptly. The court must then set it for submission or hearing, and it may consider properly filed evidence, including affidavits, discovery responses, and depositions. Late-filed evidence may be considered if the record indicates the court’s acceptance of it.[1]
5. Comments and Intent of the 2026 Amendment
The Supreme Court of Texas stated that the 2026 rewrite of Rule 166a was not intended to substantively change summary judgment law but to implement section 23.303 of the Texas Government Code, modernize terminology, and clarify deadlines. The framework distinguishing traditional and no-evidence motions remains unchanged.[1][3]
Historical Context
Rule 166a was first adopted in 1950, largely mirroring federal summary judgment practice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. Major revisions occurred in 1997, when the Texas Supreme Court added subsection (i) introducing the no-evidence summary judgment procedure, aimed at aligning Texas practice with federal standards established in Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986).[4][5]
Subsequent case law, including Casso v. Brand, 776 S.W.2d 551 (Tex. 1989) and Nixon v. Mr. Property Mgmt. Co., 690 S.W.2d 546 (Tex. 1985), developed substantive standards for evaluating summary judgment evidence and burdens of proof.
Legal Effect
Rule 166a allows courts to dispose of cases efficiently by foreclosing claims or defenses lacking evidentiary support. The 2026 amendments modernize procedure but preserve the core dual-motion system. Texas courts continue to apply Rule 166a as a strict evidentiary test requiring either proof (for traditional motions) or a complete lack of proof (for no-evidence motions) on essential elements.