How do I protect sensitive information when filing appeals in Texas family court?
This question has been addressed in 2 Texas court opinions:
In Re D.B.
COA01 — February 19, 2026
In a mandamus proceeding arising from a contempt order in a child-related lawsuit, Relator D.B. submitted filings containing sensitive information, such as unredacted minor names and birth dates, in violation of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.9. The First Court of Appeals struck the non-compliant documents and provided a seven-day window for the Relator to file redacted versions. Instead of curing the deficiencies, the Relator filed a 'Request to Withdraw Mandamus.' The court analyzed the request as a motion for voluntary dismissal and held that the proceeding should be dismissed without prejudice, effectively ending the appellate challenge due to procedural non-compliance and the Relator's subsequent abandonment of the petition.
Litigation Takeaway
“Strict compliance with privacy rules is not optional; failing to redact sensitive information like children's names and birth dates under TRAP 9.9 can lead to your appellate filings being struck and your case being dismissed before the court ever hears the merits.”
Mengistu Taye v. 3000 Sage Apartments
COA14 — January 27, 2026
In Taye v. 3000 Sage Apartments, the appellant challenged a trial court's denial of a motion to 'seal or redact' sensitive data within court records. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals analyzed the distinction between Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 76a, which governs the sealing of entire court records, and Rule 21c, which governs the redaction of specific sensitive data points like Social Security numbers and bank accounts. The court found that while Rule 76a specifically authorizes an immediate interlocutory appeal, Rule 21c does not. Applying a substance-over-form analysis, the court determined the appellant was seeking redaction rather than sealing. Consequently, the court held it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal because the order was neither a final judgment nor a statutorily authorized interlocutory appeal.
Litigation Takeaway
“Labeling a motion as a 'Motion to Seal' will not grant you an automatic right to an interlocutory appeal if the substance of your request is merely the redaction of sensitive data under Rule 21c. To preserve the right to an immediate appeal regarding privacy, practitioners must strictly comply with the procedural requirements of Rule 76a; otherwise, the only path for immediate appellate relief is the significantly higher burden of a Petition for Writ of Mandamus.”