Last amended January 1, 1988 · Last verified June 28, 2026
In one sentenceRule 324 makes a motion for new trial unnecessary to most appellate complaints but required for a defined list — jury misconduct, newly discovered evidence, factual sufficiency, excessive or inadequate damages, and incurable jury argument — and governs cross-points after a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
(a)Motion for New Trial Not Required. A point in a motion for new trial is not a prerequisite to a complaint on appeal in either a jury or a nonjury case, except as provided in subdivision (b).
(b)Motion for New Trial Required. A point in a motion for new trial is a prerequisite to the following complaints on appeal:
(1)A complaint on which evidence must be heard such as one of jury misconduct or newly discovered evidence or failure to set aside a judgment by default;
(2)A complaint of factual insufficiency of the evidence to support a jury finding;
(3)A complaint that a jury finding is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence;
(4)A complaint of inadequacy or excessiveness of the damages found by the jury; or
(5)Incurable jury argument if not otherwise ruled on by the trial court.
(c)Judgment Notwithstanding Findings; Cross-Points. When judgment is rendered non obstante verdicto or notwithstanding the findings of a jury on one or more questions, the appellee may bring forward by cross-point contained in his brief filed in the Court of Appeals any ground which would have vitiated the verdict or would have prevented an affirmance of the judgment had one been rendered by the trial court in harmony with the verdict, including although not limited to the ground that one or more of the jury's findings have insufficient support in the evidence or are against the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence as a matter of fact, and the ground that the verdict and judgment based thereon should be set aside because of improper argument of counsel. The failure to bring forward by cross-points such grounds as would vitiate the verdict shall be deemed a waiver thereof; provided, however, that if a cross-point is upon a ground which requires the taking of evidence in addition to that adduced upon the trial of the cause, it is not necessary that the evidentiary hearing be held until after the appellate court determines that the cause be remanded to consider such a cross-point.
End
Plain-English Summary
Rule 324 marks when a motion for new trial is needed to appeal. As a rule, a point in a motion for new trial is not a prerequisite to a complaint on appeal in either a jury or a nonjury case. Subdivision (b) carves out the exceptions. A motion for new trial is required to preserve a complaint that needs an evidentiary hearing — jury misconduct, newly discovered evidence, or failure to set aside a default judgment — and to preserve a complaint of factual insufficiency of the evidence, a finding against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, inadequate or excessive jury damages, or incurable jury argument not otherwise ruled on.
Subdivision (c) governs cross-points. When the trial court renders judgment notwithstanding the verdict or disregards one or more jury findings, the appellee may bring forward by cross-point in its Court of Appeals brief any ground that would have vitiated the verdict or prevented an affirmance — including that findings have insufficient support or run against the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence, or that improper argument tainted the result. Failing to bring such a ground waives it; but a cross-point that needs additional evidence is not heard until the appellate court remands for that purpose.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do you need a motion for new trial to appeal in Texas?
Usually no. But Rule 324(b) requires one for specific complaints, including jury misconduct, newly discovered evidence, failure to set aside a default, factual insufficiency, a finding against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, excessive or inadequate damages, and incurable jury argument.
What are cross-points under Rule 324?
After a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the appellee uses cross-points in its appellate brief to raise any ground that would have undone the verdict or blocked affirmance. Failing to raise them waives them.
Source & verification. Rule text and the official Notes and Comments are reproduced verbatim from the
Texas Rules of Civil Procedure (Tex. R. Civ. P. 324), published by the Texas Judicial Branch (txcourts.gov).
Promulgated by the Supreme Court of Texas. The plain-English summary is original and draws on official sources. Last verified June 28, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as:prerequisites of appealmotion for new trial requiredpreserving errorcross-pointsfactual insufficiencyTRCP 324