law-DWOP dismissal | reinstatement | motion to reinstate after DWOP | reinstate |
DWOP Dismissal for Want of Prosecution under Rule 165a
A trial court may dismiss a case for want of prosecution under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 165a when a party
fails to appear at a hearing or trial or when the case has not been disposed of within the Texas Supreme Court’
s time standards. Tex. R. Civ. P. 165a(1), (2). A trial court also has inherent power to dismiss when the case
has not been prosecuted with due diligence. Villarreal v. San Antonio Truck & Equip., 994 S.W.2d 628, 630
(Tex. 1999). An appellate court reviews a trial court’s ruling on a motion to dismiss for want of prosecution for
an abuse of discretion. Jones v. Morales, 318 S.W.3d 419, 427 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2010, pet. denied) (citing
MacGregor v. Rich, 941 S.W.2d 74, 75 (Tex. 1997)). A trial court abuses its discretion when it acts in an
arbitrary or unreasonable manner, or if it acts without reference to any guiding rules or principles. Moss v.
Waste Mgmt. of Tex., Inc., 305 S.W.3d 76, 81 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009, pet. denied).
SUPREME COURT TIME STANDARDS FOR CASE DISPOSITION
Rule 6 sets the guidelines for a case to be “brought to trial or final disposition.”
Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 6(b)(2)
Texas Supreme Court guidelines
Under Rule 6 of the Rules of Judicial Administration, in a non-jury civil case (other than a family law case),
the trial court “should, so far as reasonably possible, ensure that all cases are brought to trial or final
disposition . . . [w]ithin 12 months from appearance date.” Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 6(b)(2), reprinted in Tex. Gov’t
Code Ann., tit. 2, subtit. F—Appendix (West Supp. 2010). The Supreme Court makes the Rules of Judicial
Administration under the Legislature’s grant of authority in section 74.024 of the Texas Government Code.
Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 1; see also Jones, 318 S.W.3d at 427. Section 74.024 provides that “the supreme court
may consider the adoption of rules relating to: (1) nonbinding time standards for pleading, discovery, motions,
and dispositions; (2) nonbinding dismissal of inactive cases from dockets, if the dismissal is warranted . . . .”
Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 74.024(c)(1), (2) (West Supp. 2010). “[T]he application of Rule 6 is discretionary and
non-binding.” Jones, 318 S.W.3d at 427 (citing In re S.D.W., 811 S.W.2d 739, 746 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st
Dist.] 1991, no writ)). “Thus, Rule 6 does not fix a bright line demarking the outward limit of a trial court’s
discretion to control its docket.” Id.
CAUSES OF ACTION ELEMENTS | HOUSTON CASE LAW | TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS
HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE