41.1. Decision by Panel
(a) Constitution of Panel. Unless a court of appeals with more than three justices votes to decide a case en banc, a case must be assigned for decision to a panel of the court consisting of three justices, although not every member of the panel must be present for argument. If the case is decided without argument, three justices must participate in the decision. A majority of the panel, which constitutes a quorum, must agree on the judgment. Except as otherwise provided in these rules, a panel’s opinion constitutes the court’s opinion, and the court must render a judgment in accordance with the panel opinion.
(b) When Panel Cannot Agree on Judgment. After argument, if for any reason a member of the panel cannot participate in deciding a case, the case may be decided by the two remaining justices. If they cannot agree on a judgment, the chief justice of the court of appeals must:
(1) designate another justice of the court to sit on the panel to consider the case;
(2) request the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to temporarily assign an eligible justice or judge to sit on the panel to consider the case; or
(3) convene the court en banc to consider the case. The reconstituted panel or the en banc court may order the case reargued.
(c) When Court Cannot Agree on Judgment. After argument, if for any reason a member of a court consisting of only three justices cannot participate in deciding a case, the case may be decided by the two remaining justices. If they cannot agree on a judgment, that fact must be certified to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice may then temporarily assign an eligible justice or judge to sit with the court of appeals to consider the case. The reconstituted court may order the case reargued.
41.2. Decision by En Banc Court
(a) Constitution of En Banc Court. An en banc court consists of all members of the court who are not disqualified or recused and — if the case was originally argued before or decided by a panel — any members of the panel who are not members of the court but remain eligible for assignment to the court. A majority of the en banc court constitute a quorum. A majority of the en banc court must agree on a judgment.
(b) When En Banc Court Cannot Agree on Judgment. If a majority of an en banc court cannot agree on a judgment, that fact must be certified to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice may then temporarily assign an eligible justice or judge to sit with the court of appeals to consider the case. The reconstituted court may order the case reargued.
(c) En Banc Consideration Disfavored. En banc consideration of a case is not favored and should not be ordered unless necessary to secure or maintain uniformity of the court’s decisions or unless extraordinary circumstances require en banc consideration. A vote to determine whether a case will be considered or reconsidered en banc need not be taken unless a justice of the court requests a vote. If a vote is requested and a majority of the court’s members vote to consider or reconsider the case en banc, the en banc court will consider or reconsider the case. Otherwise, a panel of the court will consider the case.
41.3. Precedent in Transferred Cases
In cases transferred by the Supreme Court from one court of appeals to another, the court of appeals to which the case is transferred must decide the case in accordance with the precedent of the transferor court under principles of stare decisis if the transferee court’s decision otherwise would have been inconsistent with the precedent of the transferor court. The court’s opinion may state whether the outcome would have been different had the transferee court not been required to decide the case in accordance with the transferor court’s precedent.
Notes and Comments
Comment to 1997 change: This is former Rule 79. The rule is reorganized. Paragraphs 41.1(b) and (c) are amended to make clear that a three judge panel must hear the case. Therefore, only if a member of a panel is lost after argument do the provisions for appointment of another justice to break a deadlock come into play. Paragraph 41.2(a) is amended to define an en banc court.
Comment to 2008 change: Subdivisions 41.1 and 41.2 are amended to acknowledge the full authority of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to temporarily assign a justice or judge to hear a matter pending in an appellate court. The statutory provisions governing the assignment of judges to appellate courts are located in Chapters 74 and 75 of the Government Code. Other minor changes are made for consistency. Subdivision 41.3 is added to require, in appellate cases transferred by the Supreme Court under Section 73.001 of the Government Code for docket equalization or other purposes, that the transferee court must generally resolve any conflict between the precedent of the transferor court and the precedent of the transferee court — or that of any other intermediate appellate court the transferee court otherwise would have followed — by following the precedent of the transferor court, unless it appears that the transferor court itself would not be bound by that precedent. The rule requires the transferee court to “stand in the shoes” of the transferor court so that an appellate transfer will not produce a different outcome, based on application of substantive law, than would have resulted had the case not been transferred. The transferee court is not expected to follow the transferor court’s local rules or otherwise supplant its own local procedures with those of the transferor court.