Quick answer: To challenge TABC’s final order, a party must first file a motion for rehearing within 25 days of the date the order is signed. A timely motion is a prerequisite to appeal. If it does not change the result, the party can seek judicial review in district court, where the court applies the substantial-evidence rule: it asks whether the order is reasonable and supported by the record, not whether it was correct, and it does not re-try the facts.
Start with the final order, not the proposal
The administrative law judge’s Proposal for Decision is a recommendation, not the end of the case. What a business actually challenges is the final order issued by TABC’s commissioners after they adopt, reject, or modify that proposal. The appeal clock runs from that order.
Step 1: the motion for rehearing
Under Government Code Section 2001.146, a motion for rehearing in a contested case must be filed no later than the 25th day after the order is signed. (The Legislature raised this deadline from 20 days to 25 days in 2015.) Two requirements make or break it. First, timing: under Section 2001.145, a timely motion for rehearing is generally a prerequisite to an appeal, so missing the deadline can forfeit judicial review entirely. Second, content: the motion must identify with particularity the findings of fact or conclusions of law it challenges and any evidentiary or legal ruling claimed to be erroneous, and state the basis for the claimed error. A vague motion can waive the points it was meant to preserve.
After the motion is filed, the agency must act on it within 55 days of the signed order, or it is overruled by operation of law. Either way, that resolution is what clears the path to court.
Step 2: district court review
If rehearing does not fix the result, the business can seek judicial review in district court. The standard is the substantial-evidence rule (Alcoholic Beverage Code Section 11.67(b) and Government Code Section 2001.174). This is a deferential review, and the distinction matters: the court asks whether the order is reasonable and supported by substantial evidence, not whether the court would have decided the same way. It may not substitute its judgment for the agency’s on the weight of the evidence. The party challenging the order carries the burden to show it is not supported.
Step 3: further appeal
A district court’s judgment in one of these cases can itself be appealed, in the manner provided for civil actions generally under Government Code Section 2001.901. Throughout, the rule of exhaustion applies: a party generally must complete the administrative remedies, including the motion for rehearing, before a court will reach the merits.
The timeline at a glance
- Day 0: TABC commissioners sign the final order.
- By day 25: File the motion for rehearing, with particularity.
- By day 55: The agency acts, or the motion is overruled by operation of law.
- After that: Seek judicial review in district court under the substantial-evidence rule.
- Then: A district court judgment may be appealed as in civil actions.
In practice
A bar loses at SOAH, and the commissioners issue a final order upholding a suspension. The owner intends to appeal but treats the motion for rehearing as a formality, filing on day 27 with a one-line objection. Both problems are fatal in different ways: the filing is late under the 25-day deadline, and even a timely version that only said the order was “wrong,” without identifying the specific findings and rulings challenged, would not have preserved the issues. The path to district court closes not on the merits but on the prerequisites.
FAQ
How long do I have to challenge a TABC final order?
File a motion for rehearing no later than 25 days after the order is signed. A timely motion is generally a prerequisite to appeal, so missing the deadline can forfeit judicial review.
Can I skip straight to court?
Generally no. Under Section 2001.145, a timely motion for rehearing is a prerequisite to an appeal in a contested case, with only narrow exceptions.
What does the district court look at?
Whether the order is reasonable and supported by substantial evidence, under Section 11.67(b) and Government Code Section 2001.174, not whether the order was correct.
Can the court re-decide the facts?
No. Under the substantial-evidence rule, the court reviews the reasonableness of the order and may not substitute its judgment for the agency’s on the weight of the evidence.
Current as of June 2026. This article is general educational information, not legal advice. Deadlines and review standards change; verify the current motion-for-rehearing deadline (Government Code Section 2001.146) and consult a qualified Texas attorney about your specific situation.