<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>declaratory judgments on Texas Appeals Journal</title><link>https://texasappeals.org/topics/declaratory-judgments/</link><description>Clinical descriptions of the Texas appellate decisions drawing the most press coverage.</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 07:00:00 -0500</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://texasappeals.org/topics/declaratory-judgments/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Supreme Court of Texas Holds Citizens Participation Act Applies to Lilith Fund’s Suit Challenging Heartbeat Act</title><link>https://texasappeals.org/2026/06/weldon-v-lilith-fund-tcpa/</link><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://texasappeals.org/2026/06/weldon-v-lilith-fund-tcpa/</guid><description>The court held that the Fund’s declaratory-judgment suit against Sadie Weldon was “based on or . . . in response to” her earlier Rule 202 pre-suit deposition petition, so the first step of the TCPA dismissal procedure was met. The opinion does not decide whether Senate Bill 8 is constitutional or whether the suit must be dismissed, and it remands the remaining steps to the court of appeals.</description></item><item><title>Third Court of Appeals Dismisses Cities’ Challenge to Texas Regulatory Consistency Act for Lack of Standing</title><link>https://texasappeals.org/2025/08/state-v-city-of-houston-hb-2127/</link><pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2025 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://texasappeals.org/2025/08/state-v-city-of-houston-hb-2127/</guid><description>The court held that Houston, San Antonio and El Paso did not plead an injury-in-fact or an injury traceable to the State of Texas, reversed a trial-court judgment declaring House Bill 2127 unconstitutional, and dismissed the suit without prejudice. The court did not decide whether the Act is constitutional.</description></item><item><title>Supreme Court of Texas Holds Attorney General May Seek to File Quo Warranto Action Against Annunciation House</title><link>https://texasappeals.org/2025/06/paxton-v-annunciation-house-quo-warranto/</link><pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2025 07:00:00 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://texasappeals.org/2025/06/paxton-v-annunciation-house-quo-warranto/</guid><description>The court held that criminal acts are not categorically excluded as grounds for quo warranto, that the trial court applied the wrong standard in denying the Attorney General leave to file, and that the records-request statutes are not facially unconstitutional. The opinion states that it does not decide the merits of the harboring allegations.</description></item></channel></rss>