Last updated: August 8, 2026
Not sure whether you qualify? The eligibility checker walks the three Baker v. Goldsmith elements, flags the non-service exception, and tells you what evidence each element needs. Nothing leaves your browser.
A Bill of Review is an equitable proceeding used in Texas to set aside a final judgment that is no longer subject to a motion for new trial or appeal. In custody cases, Bills of Review are most commonly filed when a parent was denied due process — for example, when a default judgment was entered because the parent was never properly notified of the lawsuit.
This page is part of our complete SAPCR Texas guide.
What Is a Bill of Review in Texas Custody Cases?
A bill of review is an independent legal action filed to set aside a prior final judgment after normal appeal deadlines have passed. In Texas custody cases, it is most commonly used when a parent lost rights through a default judgment and was denied a fair opportunity to participate due to improper service or fraud.
A Bill of Review is an independent action filed in the same court that entered the original judgment. It is not an appeal. It is a new lawsuit asking the court to set aside a prior final judgment on equitable grounds. Bills of Review are governed by common law and by TRCP Rule 329b, which establishes the timelines after which judgments become final and can no longer be challenged by motion for new trial.
Under Rule 329b, a judgment becomes final for purposes of appeal 30 days after signing (or 90 days if a motion for new trial is filed). After these deadlines pass, Rule 329b(f) specifically provides: "a judgment cannot be set aside by the trial court except by bill of review for sufficient cause, filed within the time allowed by law." This makes the Bill of Review the exclusive remedy once the court's plenary power expires. A judgment that is genuinely void is a narrow exception, but that exception is far smaller than it is usually described — a no-deadline attack requires the defect to be apparent from the face of the record. See void custody judgments below before relying on it, and plan around four years.
Three Elements Required for a Bill of Review in Texas
To win a bill of review in Texas, you must prove three elements: (1) you had a meritorious defense to the original case, (2) fraud, accident, or wrongful conduct prevented you from presenting that defense, and (3) your failure to appear was not due to your own negligence.
To succeed on a Bill of Review, the petitioner must prove all three of the following elements by a preponderance of the evidence:
1. Meritorious Defense or Claim
You must show that you had a valid defense to the underlying SAPCR that, if presented, would have produced a different result. In custody cases, this typically means showing that a different conservatorship arrangement, possession schedule, or child support amount would have been ordered if you had participated in the case. You do not need to prove you would have won; you need to show that your defense has sufficient merit that it ought to be heard.
2. Fraud, Accident, or Wrongful Act of the Opposing Party
You must prove that the opposing party's fraud, accident, or wrongful act prevented you from presenting your defense. This is the most critical element in custody default judgment cases. Common examples include:
- Filing a false Certificate of Last Known Address under Rule 239a, causing service by posting to an address where the respondent does not live
- Serving the petition at an address the petitioner knew was incorrect
- Failing to make diligent efforts to locate the respondent before resorting to service by publication
- Concealing the existence of the lawsuit from the respondent
The fraud must be extrinsic, not intrinsic. For a detailed explanation of this distinction, see our guide on extrinsic fraud in Texas.
3. No Negligence on the Part of the Petitioner
You must show that your failure to appear and defend the original case was not the result of your own negligence. If you were aware of the lawsuit and simply chose not to respond, or if you received the citation but ignored it, the court will deny the Bill of Review. However, if you were never served, were served at a wrong address, or were actively misled about the proceedings, you can satisfy this element.
Extrinsic vs. Intrinsic Fraud in Texas Family Law
This distinction is critical in Bill of Review cases:
- Extrinsic fraud is fraud that prevents a party from having the opportunity to present their case at all. Examples include fraudulent service of process, concealment of the lawsuit, or preventing the party from attending the hearing. Extrinsic fraud supports a Bill of Review.
- Intrinsic fraud is fraud that occurs within the trial itself, such as perjured testimony, forged documents introduced as evidence, or concealment of evidence. Intrinsic fraud generally does not support a Bill of Review because the defrauded party had the opportunity to attend the trial and challenge the evidence.
Bill of Review Statute of Limitations in Texas
A bill of review in Texas must generally be filed within four years of the judgment date. If the judgment is void — for example where the court lacked jurisdiction because of defective service — a no-deadline attack may be possible, but only where the defect is apparent on the face of the record (PNS Stores v. Rivera). Plan around the four years.
A Bill of Review must generally be filed within four years of the date the judgment was signed. This is the residual statute of limitations under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 16.051. The four-year clock may be tolled (paused) by the discovery rule if the petitioner did not and could not have known about the judgment through reasonable diligence.
Void Custody Judgments: The Narrow "No Time Limit" Exception
A judgment that is void — as opposed to merely voidable — can in principle be attacked at any time. A judgment is void if the court lacked jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter, or if it was rendered in violation of due process so fundamental that the court exceeded its authority. A judgment entered without any service of process at all may be void.
Be careful with this, because it is the most over-repeated claim in this area. A no-deadline collateral attack requires the defect to be apparent from the face of the record. PNS Stores, Inc. v. Rivera, 379 S.W.3d 267, 272–73 (Tex. 2012). Where a return of service recites valid service, the record looks regular on its face, and proving otherwise takes evidence from outside it — which means a bill of review, inside the four-year period. Plan around four years. Treat the no-deadline rule as a fallback argument, not a schedule.
Where to File a Bill of Review in Texas
A Bill of Review must be filed in the same court that entered the original judgment. It is assigned a new cause number and proceeds as a separate lawsuit. The respondent in the Bill of Review (the party who obtained the original judgment) must be served with the Bill of Review petition and has the right to answer and defend the original judgment.
Because it is a new suit, it has to clear the clerk's intake like any other original petition. No Se to Pro Se covers getting a document filed in a Texas court — what the clerk needs, and the rule that says a clerk may not refuse a filing for being in the wrong format.
Documented Example: Cause No. 2025-92876
In the documented Harris County case, a default SAPCR judgment (Cause No. 202417675) was entered in the 311th District Court on August 20, 2024. The respondent was never notified of the hearing and did not learn of the judgment until October 2025. A Bill of Review was filed as Cause No. 2025-92876 in the 311th District Court, alleging that the petitioner's attorney filed a false Certificate of Last Known Address under Rule 239a, enabling service by posting to an address the respondent had not occupied in over a decade.
A separate fraud lawsuit (Cause No. 2025-95850) was also filed against the attorney in the 189th District Court. Source: Harris County District Clerk public records, hcdistrictclerk.com.
New Trial Timelines Under TRCP Rule 329b
Before filing a Bill of Review, consider whether other remedies are available:
- Motion for New Trial: Must be filed within 30 days of the judgment. The court has 75 days to rule; if it does not, the motion is denied by operation of law.
- Motion to Reinstate (after dismissal): Must be filed within 30 days of the order of dismissal.
- Restricted Appeal: Available within six months of the judgment if the party did not participate in the hearing and the error is apparent on the face of the record.
If all of these deadlines have passed, Rule 329b(f) makes the Bill of Review the exclusive remaining remedy. It must be filed "within the time allowed by law" — generally four years. However, the court may at any time correct a clerical error under Rule 316, and may also declare a previous judgment void if signed after the court's plenary power had expired.
Steps to File a Bill of Review in Texas Custody Cases
- Obtain copies of all filings in the original case from the district clerk, including the petition, citation, return of service, Certificate of Last Known Address, and the final judgment.
- Document your actual address at the time of service and at the time of the default judgment hearing.
- Prepare a Bill of Review petition setting forth the three required elements with supporting evidence.
- File the Bill of Review in the same court that entered the original judgment.
- Serve the opposing party with the Bill of Review petition.
- Be prepared for a trial on the merits of the Bill of Review, at which you must prove all three elements.
Step six is a trial, and having the evidence is not the same as the judge being allowed to consider it. No Se to Pro Se covers marking, offering and authenticating an exhibit, which is how the proof of your three elements actually reaches the court.
Bill of Review vs. Modification (Chapter 156): Why the BOR Is the Right Remedy for Fraud
Parents who discover a default custody judgment sometimes consider filing a Modification under Texas Family Code Chapter 156 instead of a Bill of Review. While both can change a custody arrangement, they serve fundamentally different purposes — and for a judgment obtained through fraud, the Bill of Review is the correct and more powerful remedy.
What Modification Does
A modification under Chapter 156 asks the court to change an existing valid order because circumstances have changed. Under § 156.101, the court may modify conservatorship or possession if modification is in the child's best interest and:
- Circumstances have materially and substantially changed since the order was rendered or a mediated agreement was signed
- The child is at least 12 and has expressed a preference to the court
- The conservator with the exclusive right to designate primary residence has voluntarily relinquished primary care for 6+ months
A modification accepts the original judgment as valid and simply asks to change it going forward. It does not challenge how the judgment was obtained.
What a Bill of Review Does
A Bill of Review asks the court to set aside the judgment entirely on the ground that it was obtained through fraud, accident, or wrongful act. Under Rule 329b(f), once plenary power expires, a Bill of Review is the exclusive remedy to vacate a judgment. It attacks the validity of the judgment itself.
Why the Bill of Review Is Better for Fraud Cases
| Factor | Modification (Ch. 156) | Bill of Review |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | Change a valid order | Void a fraudulent order |
| Treats original judgment as | Legitimate and valid | Obtained through fraud — illegitimate |
| Burden of proof | Material and substantial change in circumstances | Meritorious defense + fraud prevented defense + no negligence |
| Effect if granted | New order replaces old — but old order was valid during its life | Original judgment is set aside as if it never existed |
| Addresses the fraud | No — fraud is not a ground for modification | Yes — fraud is a core element of the claim |
| Void judgment | Cannot attack a void judgment | Can attack a void judgment; no-deadline only if the defect shows on the record |
| Within 1 year restriction | § 156.102 imposes higher standard within first year | No such restriction — fraud is fraud regardless of timing |
| Supports related fraud lawsuit | No — accepts the order as valid, undermining fraud claims | Yes — directly alleges the judgment was obtained by fraud |
The Critical Problem with Using Modification for Fraud
Filing a modification instead of a Bill of Review when you believe the judgment was obtained through fraud creates a serious legal problem: a modification implicitly accepts the original judgment as valid. By asking the court to modify the order rather than set it aside, you are conceding that the court had jurisdiction and that the judgment was properly entered. This undermines any separate fraud claim and waives the argument that the judgment is void.
Under § 156.101, the grounds for modification — material and substantial change, child's preference, or voluntary relinquishment — do not include fraud. There is no mechanism in Chapter 156 to argue that the original judgment should never have been entered because service was defective or because a false Certificate of Last Known Address was filed.
A Bill of Review, by contrast, directly attacks the validity of the judgment. It preserves the argument that the court lacked jurisdiction over the respondent because service was never properly accomplished, and it is consistent with a parallel fraud lawsuit against the attorney who filed the false documents.
How much time do you actually have left?
Enter the date the order was signed and the date you found out about it. You will see which remedies are still open — motion for new trial, Rule 306a, restricted appeal, or bill of review — and how many days are left on each. Free, no signup, nothing leaves your browser.
Check my deadlines →Frequently Asked Questions
How long do I have to file a bill of review in Texas?
Generally four years from the date the judgment was signed, under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 16.051. Plan around that figure rather than relying on the void-judgment exception, which requires the defect to appear on the face of the record.
What if I was never served at all?
That is the strongest position available. Under Peralta v. Heights Medical Center, 485 U.S. 80 (1988) and Caldwell v. Barnes, 154 S.W.3d 93 (Tex. 2004), a petitioner who proves non-service is relieved of showing a meritorious defense and of showing fraud. Everything then turns on proof, which is why the return of service in the court file matters more than what anyone remembers.
Is a bill of review the same as an appeal?
No. An appeal asks a higher court to review what the trial court did on the existing record. A bill of review is a new lawsuit, filed in the same court that rendered the judgment, with its own cause number and its own evidence.
Can I file one if I missed the deadline for a motion for new trial?
Yes — that is largely what it exists for. A motion for new trial closes at 30 days and a restricted appeal at six months. Once those have run, the bill of review is usually the only route left.
Do I need a lawyer to file a bill of review?
Not as a requirement; you may file pro se. But this is an equitable proceeding with a two-stage structure and a threshold that ends most petitions before the merits, so it is among the worst places to be unrepresented. See our legal aid directory for free and low-cost options.
How do I know whether I have a case?
Start with the court file for the original cause number and look for two documents: the return of service and any Certificate of Last Known Address. Our eligibility checker walks the three elements against your situation and lists the evidence each one needs, and the deadline calculator shows which remedies remain open.