Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 SEPTEMBER 2026

By The Numbers: The Texas Supreme Court’s 2025–26 Term

Baker Botts L.L.P.
Baker Botts L.L.P.
Contributor
Baker Botts L.L.P.

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Baker Botts is a leading international law firm with 11 offices located in the US, Europe, and the...

View firm profile
Explore more from Baker Botts L.L.P.

The Texas Supreme Court concluded its 2025-26 term with 143 opinions resolving 110 cases, marking a notable increase in separate writings compared to prior terms. This comprehensive statistical analysis examines case distribution across courts of appeals, timing metrics, subject matter trends, and reversal rates, revealing shifts in the Court's docket management and opinion-writing patterns.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Daniel Rankin
Daniel Rankin

On September 1st, the Texas Supreme Court officially closed out its 2025–26 term, and it did so with significant numbers: I count 143 opinions resolving 110 cases with 58 oral arguments. (That’s about 1.3 opinions per decided case.) Here’s how those figures further break down: 56 were signed majorities, 28 were per curiam, and 60 were separate writings (i.e., concurrences, dissents, and statements respecting a particular disposition). Those figures are fairly consistent with the prior two terms, with a noticeable jump in the number of separate opinions this term: 

Metric 2025-26 Term 2024-25 Term 2023-24 Term
Total Opinions 143 147 157
Total Cases 110 118 126
Oral Arguments

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Tenth Circuit Stays Nationwide Eligibility Injunction For Class Of 2022 In Wisne v. NCAA

On August 21, 2026, the Tenth Circuit granted the NCAA’s stay request in Wisne v. NCAA, temporarily restoring the NCAA’s age-based eligibility rules pending resolution of the appeal. Three weeks earlier, Judge Sweeney of the District of Colorado had issued a nationwide injunction that permitted athletes in the Class of 2022 to pursue a fifth year of eligibility.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney
Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney
Article

“LEGAL ANALYSIS SO POOR THAT IT HARDLY DESERVES THE LABEL”: Fifth Circuit COA Destroys Federal Judge For Using AI And I Cannot Believe Lawyers Are Still Using This Junk

A Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling harshly criticizes a federal district judge for relying on AI-generated content in legal orders, revealing fabricated facts and poor legal analysis. The decision raises critical questions about the use of generative AI in legal practice and whether lawyers who adopt such technology are compromising their ethical obligations of competence, confidentiality, and integrity.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Troutman Amin LLP
Troutman Amin LLP
Article

Supreme Court To Review Constitutionality Of Federal Home-Distilling Ban

The U.S. Supreme Court will review a constitutional challenge to an 1868 federal law banning home distilleries, creating an opportunity to resolve a circuit split between the 5th and 6th Circuit Courts of Appeals. The case centers on whether the prohibition violates the Constitution's Taxation Clause or represents a legitimate exercise of congressional power to prevent tax evasion.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Taft, Stettinius & Hollister LLP
Taft, Stettinius & Hollister LLP
Article

California Federal Court Denies TikTok’s Motion To Dismiss Children’s Privacy Claims Based On Prior Class Action Settlements

A federal court rejected TikTok's attempt to use two prior nationwide class action settlements—totaling over $93 million—to dismiss new privacy claims brought by minors alleging violations of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. The ruling hinged on whether the current plaintiffs were demonstrably members of the earlier settlement classes based solely on the pleadings, raising critical questions about the scope and enforceability of broad settlement releases in successive privacy litiga
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Article

Show Your Work: California Federal Court Denies Preliminary Approval Of Data Breach Class Action Settlement

A federal court in California denied preliminary approval of a $2.3 million data breach settlement affecting over 220,000 individuals, finding seven critical deficiencies in the proposed agreement. The decision highlights the rigorous scrutiny courts apply to class action settlements, particularly regarding claims-made distribution processes, inadequate documentation of settlement value, and unexplained disparate treatment among class members.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Article

Venture Global Update: Galp Prevails In Latest LNG Commissioning Dispute

An ICC tribunal has ruled in favor of Galp in its dispute with Venture Global over the Calcasieu Pass LNG facility, finding that Venture Global breached its obligation to declare the facility operational in a timely manner. This decision adds to a series of contrasting outcomes in similar disputes involving other buyers, with damages yet to be determined in a hearing scheduled for 2027 or 2028.
United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Bracewell LLP
Bracewell LLP
Article

Booking Holdings v. Commission: General Court Clears The Way For Reverse Leveraging

The General Court of the European Union has upheld the European Commission's prohibition of Booking Holdings' acquisition of eTraveli Group, endorsing for the first time a 'reverse leveraging' theory of harm in conglomerate mergers. This landmark judgment establishes that dominant companies can be blocked from acquiring complementary businesses even when the target operates in a market where the acquirer lacks dominance, fundamentally reshaping merger control enforcement in digital and ecosystem-driven mark
United StatesAntitrust/Competition Law
Baker Botts L.L.P.
Baker Botts L.L.P.