Texas Bar Exam Distinctions

TEXAS BAR EXAM DISTINCTIONS

Texas is now a Uniform Bar Exam (UBE) jurisdiction. Since February 2021, the Texas Bar Examination has consisted of the three standardized UBE components—the Multistate Bar Examination (MBE), the Multistate Essay Examination (MEE), and the Multistate Performance Test (MPT)—rather than the old Texas-essay-heavy format. As a practical matter, this means the law you are tested on is overwhelmingly the national, uniform doctrine covered in the universal outlines, not idiosyncratic Texas rules. This page exists to do two things: (1) explain exactly how the Texas exam works today, including the Texas-specific licensing requirement that sits alongside the UBE; and (2) cover the genuine areas where Texas substantive and procedural law diverges in ways worth knowing—both because Texas tested them heavily in the past and because they are foundational to actually practicing in Texas. The single largest of these is community property, which gets the most depth below.

📘 Texas adopted the Uniform Bar Exam (UBE) in February 2021, so the substance tested is now the national MBE and MEE doctrine. For the full tested law, see the MBE Subject Outlines and MEE Subject Outlines. This page covers Texas's exam format plus the Texas-specific rules worth knowing for practice and the Texas-law components.

I. THE TEXAS EXAM FORMAT NOW

Understanding the structure matters because it tells you where Texas-specific law does and does not appear. The bottom line: it almost never appears on the exam that produces your portable score. Texas-specific law is instead pushed into a separate, low-stakes licensing course.

A. The UBE: MBE, MEE, and MPT

TX Rule: Texas administers the standard UBE over two days. Day one is the written component—two MPT tasks (90 minutes each) in the morning and six MEE essays in the afternoon. Day two is the 200-question MBE. The components are weighted in the standard UBE proportions: the MBE counts for 50% of the total scaled score, the MEE for 30%, and the MPT for 20%. None of these components asks you to apply Texas-specific substantive law. The MEE and MPT are drafted by the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) and test general common law and uniform statutory frameworks (the Uniform Commercial Code, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Federal Rules of Evidence, the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, and so on). When an MEE question raises an issue on which jurisdictions split, the expected answer is the majority/uniform rule unless the question instructs otherwise.

Score portability. Because Texas gives the UBE, examinees earn a single portable UBE score that can be transferred to any other UBE jurisdiction (subject to that state's own minimum and transfer-window rules). Conversely, an applicant who earned a qualifying UBE score in another UBE state can transfer that score to Texas instead of re-sitting the exam. TX Rule: Texas requires a minimum UBE score of 270 (out of 400) to be eligible for a Texas license. That is on the higher end nationally; many UBE states set their cut score at 260 or 266.

B. The Texas Law Component (TLC)

This is the piece that trips people up because it is genuinely Texas-specific, but it is not part of the graded bar exam. TX Rule: Separate from the UBE score, every applicant for a Texas license must complete the Texas Law Component (TLC). The TLC is an online, self-study course followed by an assessment covering Texas-specific law that practicing Texas lawyers need to know. Its subject areas include Texas civil procedure and evidence, Texas business associations, Texas consumer law (the Deceptive Trade Practices Act), Texas family law and marital property, Texas real property and homestead, Texas wills and estates/probate, and the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, among others.

The TLC is pass/fail and is not weighted into your UBE score; it does not affect score portability. You may take it before or after sitting for the UBE, and it can be completed on your own schedule online. The practical effect is that all the historically "Texas-tested" essay subjects—community property, Texas procedure, homestead, Texas wills—did not disappear from Texas licensing; they migrated from the graded essay exam to the TLC. That is precisely why the topics below are still worth your time: they are the backbone of the TLC, and they remain essential to competent Texas practice.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: On the UBE essays themselves, never apply a Texas-specific rule unless the call of the question expressly tells you to apply the law of a named jurisdiction. The default is the majority/uniform rule. A common self-inflicted wound for Texas-trained examinees is to instinctively write a community-property or Texas-procedure answer on an MEE that is testing the common-law/uniform default. Read the instruction line, identify the governing body of law, and answer to that.

TX BAR TIP: Plan the TLC deliberately—do not let it become an afterthought you discover at the licensing stage. Because it is online and self-paced, candidates often defer it and then scramble. Knock it out in a focused block, treat the Texas-specific outlines below as your TLC study guide, and you will satisfy both the licensing requirement and your future-practice competence in one pass.

II. TEXAS COMMUNITY PROPERTY (THE BIGGEST DISTINCTION)

Texas is one of nine community-property states, and marital property is the area where Texas law most sharply diverges from the common-law/equitable-distribution regime that governs most of the country and supplies the default on the MEE. Texas community property is grounded in the Texas Family Code and the Texas Constitution. This section gets the most depth because it is the most important Texas distinction to actually understand.

A. The Community vs. Separate Property Framework

TX Rule: Texas presumes that all property possessed by either spouse during or on dissolution of the marriage is community property (Tex. Fam. Code § 3.003). The party claiming that an asset is separate must overcome this presumption by clear and convincing evidence—a heightened standard, not a mere preponderance.

Separate property is defined narrowly and is constitutionally protected (Tex. Const. art. XVI, § 15; Tex. Fam. Code § 3.001). It consists of: (1) property owned or claimed by a spouse before marriage; (2) property acquired during marriage by gift, devise, or descent (i.e., inheritance); and (3) recovery for personal injuries sustained during the marriage, except recovery for loss of earning capacity during the marriage. Everything else acquired during marriage—wages, salary, income, and notably the income and rents produced by separate property—is community.

National: most states use a common-law/equitable-distribution model in which title and contribution drive who owns what and the court divides "marital property" equitably at divorce. Texas: ownership is fixed by the community/separate characterization as property is acquired, and that characterization—not equity—controls.

B. Inception of Title

TX Rule: Texas characterizes property by the inception-of-title rule. The character of an asset—community or separate—is fixed at the moment a party first acquires a right or claim to it, regardless of when the purchase price is fully paid. So if a spouse signs a contract to buy a house (or takes title) before marriage, the house is separate property even if community funds later pay down the mortgage during the marriage. (The community's later contributions create a reimbursement claim, discussed below, but they do not convert the asset's character.) This contrasts with the "pro-rata"/apportionment approach some community-property states use, under which an asset can be part separate and part community depending on the source of installment payments.

C. Commingling and Tracing

TX Rule: When separate funds are mixed with community funds—classically in a single bank account—the entire commingled mass is presumed community. The separate-property claimant can rebut that presumption only by tracing: identifying and following the separate funds through the account by clear and convincing evidence. Texas courts apply tracing presumptions to help, most importantly the community-out-first presumption: when withdrawals are made from a commingled account, the community funds are presumed to be drawn out first, leaving the separate funds intact in the account to the extent the balance never dropped below the separate amount. If the funds are so hopelessly commingled that the separate portion cannot be traced, the whole becomes community.

D. Reimbursement Claims

TX Rule: Because inception of title fixes character, the remedy when one marital estate's funds enhance another estate's property is a claim for reimbursement, not a change in ownership (Tex. Fam. Code ch. 3, subch. E). A reimbursement claim arises, for example, when community funds are used to pay down the principal of a debt secured by one spouse's separate-property home, or to pay for capital improvements that enhance the value of separate property. Reimbursement is an equitable claim measured by the enhancement in value (or the amount of principal reduction, depending on the theory), and it is offset by benefits the contributing estate received (such as the use and enjoyment of the property). Reimbursement is distinct from "economic contribution" formulas Texas briefly used and later repealed; the current statute is a discretionary equitable reimbursement scheme.

E. Management and Presumptions

TX Rule: Texas distinguishes between sole-management community property and joint-management community property (Tex. Fam. Code § 3.102). Community property that a spouse would have owned if single—e.g., that spouse's personal earnings, revenue from that spouse's separate property, and recoveries for that spouse's personal injuries—is subject to that spouse's sole management, control, and disposition. When sole-management property of the two spouses is mixed, or as to other community property, it becomes joint-management property requiring both spouses to act. There is also a good-faith-purchaser protection: a third party dealing with a spouse who has sole-management authority (or apparent authority based on record title) is generally protected.

F. Division on Divorce: "Just and Right"

TX Rule: On divorce, the court divides the community estate in a manner the court "deems just and right, having due regard for the rights of each party" (Tex. Fam. Code § 7.001). "Just and right" does not mean automatic 50/50; the court may award a disproportionate share based on factors such as fault in the breakup, disparity in earning capacity and education, fault, fraud on the community, health, who has custody of the children, and the size of each spouse's separate estate.

Critically—and this is the headline distinction—a Texas divorce court has no power to divest a spouse of his or her separate property. The "just and right" division reaches the community estate only. National: many equitable-distribution states can reach all property regardless of how or when acquired and reallocate it between the spouses. Texas: separate property stays with its owner; the court divides only what is community.

G. Marital Property Agreements

TX Rule: Spouses may alter the default rules by agreement, and the Texas Constitution and Family Code expressly authorize this. Premarital agreements (Tex. Fam. Code ch. 4, subch. A) and partition or exchange agreements during marriage (subch. B) let spouses convert community property to separate, or vice versa, and may even agree that future income from separate property remains separate. These agreements must be in writing and signed; they are enforceable unless the party resisting proves the agreement was not signed voluntarily or was unconscionable when signed and that party was not provided fair disclosure and did not waive it. Spouses may also agree to convert separate property to community property (subch. C), subject to specific statutory disclosure formalities.

H. Effect at Death

TX Rule: At death, a spouse owns and may dispose by will of all of his or her separate property and one-half of the community property; the surviving spouse already owns the other half of the community outright. If a spouse dies intestate, the disposition of the decedent's community half depends on whether all of the decedent's surviving children are also children of the surviving spouse: if so, the surviving spouse takes the decedent's community half (so the survivor ends up with all the community); if the decedent has children from another relationship, the decedent's community half passes to the decedent's children, not the surviving spouse. Note also that there is no elective-share regime as in common-law states—community property already gives the survivor an ownership half rather than a forced statutory share.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: If a marital-property question instructs you to apply Texas law, drive your analysis off the community presumption first, then characterize each asset by inception of title, then resolve commingling with tracing, and only then turn to division or reimbursement. State the clear-and-convincing burden expressly when discussing whether an asset is separate—graders look for the heightened standard. If the question is a generic MEE without a Texas instruction, do not use this framework; apply the common-law/equitable-distribution default instead.

TX BAR TIP: For the TLC and for practice, memorize the three-item definition of separate property verbatim (pre-marriage; gift/devise/descent; personal-injury recovery) and the two hardest counter-intuitive rules: (1) income from separate property is community, and (2) the divorce court cannot divest separate property—it can only make a "just and right" division of the community. Those two points generate the majority of community-property errors.

III. TEXAS CIVIL PROCEDURE (TRCP) HIGHLIGHTS

Texas state-court civil practice runs on the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure (TRCP), which differ in important structural ways from the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) that the MBE and MEE test. The MEE's Civil Procedure questions are federal; the items below are for Texas practice and the TLC.

A. Pleadings: Verified Denials and Special Exceptions

TX Rule: Texas requires certain defenses and denials to be verified by affidavit—a "verified denial" under TRCP 93. These include denials of matters like the plaintiff's legal capacity to sue, the defendant's liability in a representative capacity, lack of a partnership or corporate existence as alleged, and the genuineness of an account. If a defendant fails to verify such a denial, the matter is taken as admitted. TX Rule: Texas also uses the special exception (TRCP 91), a distinctive device by which a party points out defects in an opponent's pleading (vagueness, missing elements, improper joinder of causes). The court rules on the special exception and gives the pleader an opportunity to amend before dismissal—this is Texas's functional analogue to a Rule 12(b)(6) motion but with a built-in repleader right.

B. The "No-Answer" Default

TX Rule: A defendant who is properly served and fails to file an answer by the appointed deadline ("by 10:00 a.m. on the Monday next after the expiration of twenty days" after service) is subject to a no-answer default judgment. Liability is deemed admitted; the plaintiff still must prove unliquidated damages. Texas law is notably forgiving about setting these aside under the Craddock standard (failure to answer was not intentional or the result of conscious indifference but was due to a mistake or accident; the defendant sets up a meritorious defense; and the motion is filed when granting it will not cause delay or injury).

C. Discovery Levels and Discovery Control Plans

TX Rule: Texas channels all cases into one of three discovery levels with a mandatory discovery control plan (TRCP 190). Level 1 governs expedited actions—generally cases seeking $250,000 or less—with tight limits and a short discovery period. Level 2 is the default for most cases and sets a standard discovery period keyed to the trial or first deposition date, with presumptive limits on deposition hours and interrogatories. Level 3 is a tailored, court-ordered plan for complex cases. National: the FRCP scale discovery through Rule 26(f) conferences and Rule 16 scheduling orders without these fixed numeric "levels." Texas: the level is assigned at the outset and dictates the discovery architecture.

D. Summary Judgment: Traditional vs. No-Evidence

This is one of the cleanest Texas distinctions. TX Rule: Texas recognizes two species of summary judgment under TRCP 166a. A traditional motion for summary judgment (TRCP 166a(c)) requires the movant to prove there is no genuine issue of material fact and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, supported by competent summary-judgment evidence—similar in spirit to FRCP 56. But Texas also allows a no-evidence motion for summary judgment (TRCP 166a(i)), in which, after an adequate time for discovery, a party may move on the ground that there is no evidence of one or more essential elements of the opposing party's claim or defense on which that opponent bears the burden of proof. The no-evidence movant need not produce any evidence; the burden shifts to the nonmovant to come forward with more than a scintilla of evidence raising a fact issue, or summary judgment is granted. National/federal practice has only one summary-judgment standard; the express burden-shifting "no-evidence" motion is a Texas signature.

E. Statutes of Limitation

TX Rule: Texas limitations periods are set by the Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Key defaults: two years for personal injury, wrongful death, and most torts (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003); four years for breach of contract, fraud, and debt (§ 16.004, § 16.051 residual); and longer periods for real-property actions. The discovery rule (deferring accrual until the injury is or should have been discovered) applies only in limited categories where the injury is inherently undiscoverable and objectively verifiable.

F. Venue and the Plea to the Jurisdiction

TX Rule: Texas venue rules (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code ch. 15) start from a general rule—suit in the county where all or a substantial part of the events occurred, or where the defendant resides—subject to mandatory and permissive venue exceptions. A defendant challenges venue by a motion to transfer venue, which must be filed before or with the answer or it is waived. TX Rule: Texas also makes heavy use of the plea to the jurisdiction, a dispositive vehicle (especially against governmental defendants) by which a party asserts the court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction—commonly because of sovereign immunity that has not been waived. The plea to the jurisdiction can be used to dispose of a case at the threshold and can challenge the existence of jurisdictional facts, not merely the pleadings.

G. Appeals and the Two-Court-of-Last-Resort System

TX Rule: Texas has a distinctive bifurcated high-court structure. Civil appeals run from the intermediate Courts of Appeals to the Supreme Court of Texas, which is the court of last resort for civil matters. Criminal appeals run to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which is the court of last resort for criminal matters. Texas is one of only two states (Oklahoma is the other) with two separate highest courts. National: nearly every other state funnels both civil and criminal cases into a single supreme court.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: On the UBE's Civil Procedure essays, apply the FRCP—answer in terms of Rule 12 motions, Rule 56 summary judgment, Rule 26 discovery, and personal-jurisdiction due-process analysis. Save verified denials, special exceptions, no-evidence MSJs, and discovery levels for Texas-specific contexts (the TLC and practice), and never import them into a federal-procedure essay.

TX BAR TIP: For the TLC, lock in the handful of Texas procedural devices that have no clean federal twin: the verified denial (and what happens if you forget to verify), the special exception with its repleader right, the no-evidence summary judgment burden-shift, the three discovery levels, and the plea to the jurisdiction. Those, plus the two-high-court structure and the core limitations periods (2 years torts / 4 years contracts), are the highest-yield Texas-procedure facts.

IV. TEXAS PROPERTY AND HOMESTEAD

Texas real-property law tracks the common law tested on the MBE in most respects, but two areas—the constitutional homestead and the recording act—are distinctly Texan and are TLC staples.

A. The Texas Homestead Exemption

TX Rule: The Texas homestead enjoys exceptionally strong, constitutional protection from forced sale by creditors (Tex. Const. art. XVI, §§ 50–52; Tex. Prop. Code ch. 41). A debtor's homestead generally cannot be reached by general creditors; it can be foreclosed only for a short list of permitted debts: purchase-money liens, taxes on the property, properly executed home-improvement (mechanic's) liens, owelty of partition, certain refinances, reverse mortgages, and constitutionally compliant home-equity loans. The exemption is generous in size: an urban homestead may be up to 10 acres, and a rural homestead up to 100 acres for a single adult or 200 acres for a family, in each case regardless of the property's value. National: most states cap the homestead exemption at a modest dollar figure. Texas: the protection is acreage-based and, for most debts, unlimited in value.

B. Marital Homestead

TX Rule: The homestead also carries marital protections. One spouse generally cannot convey or encumber the homestead without the joinder of the other spouse, even if the property is the separate property of only one of them (Tex. Fam. Code § 5.001). On the death of one spouse, the survivor (and minor children) may have a constitutional right to continue occupying the homestead for life regardless of who inherits the underlying title.

C. The Recording Act

TX Rule: Texas's recording statute, Tex. Prop. Code § 13.001, is a notice statute. An unrecorded conveyance is void as to a subsequent purchaser for valuable consideration who takes without notice. The later bona fide purchaser who pays value and lacks actual or constructive notice prevails over a prior unrecorded grantee, whether or not the later purchaser records first. National: recording acts split among race, notice, and race-notice types; the MBE tests all three abstractly. Texas: it is a pure notice jurisdiction, so being the first to record is not what wins—being a BFP without notice is.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: On an MBE-style recording question without a jurisdiction instruction, read the statutory language the question supplies and classify it as race, notice, or race-notice before applying it—do not assume "notice" just because Texas is a notice state. On the TLC, the takeaway is the opposite: Texas is notice, and the homestead's acreage-based, constitutionally rooted protection is the marquee Texas property concept.

TX BAR TIP: Memorize the homestead acreage limits (urban 10 acres; rural 100 single / 200 family) and the closed list of debts that can defeat the homestead. The bar between "general creditors can't touch it" and the narrow permitted-lien exceptions is the single most practical Texas property point you will use.

V. TEXAS TORTS AND DAMAGES

Texas tort law is largely common law (tested on the MBE), but several statutory overlays in the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code change outcomes and are core practice knowledge.

A. Proportionate Responsibility

TX Rule: Texas uses a modified comparative responsibility system with a 51% bar (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code ch. 33). A claimant may recover only if his or her percentage of responsibility is 50% or less; if the claimant is found more than 50% responsible, recovery is barred entirely. If the claimant is 50% or less at fault, damages are reduced by the claimant's percentage. The statute submits responsibility for all parties (including settling and "responsible third parties" that a defendant designates) to the factfinder. National: jurisdictions split among pure comparative negligence, modified comparative (50% or 51% bar), and a few contributory-negligence states; the MBE typically applies pure comparative unless told otherwise. Texas: modified comparative with the 51% bar.

B. Damages Caps

TX Rule: Texas caps noneconomic damages in health-care-liability (medical malpractice) claims at $250,000 against physicians and health-care practitioners, with separate caps against health-care institutions (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code ch. 74). Economic damages (medical expenses, lost earnings) are not capped. Texas also caps exemplary (punitive) damages generally at the greater of $200,000 or two times economic damages plus an amount equal to noneconomic damages up to $750,000 (§ 41.008), with exceptions for certain felonies.

C. Dram Shop Liability

TX Rule: Under the Texas Dram Shop Act (Tex. Alco. Bev. Code ch. 2), a provider of alcoholic beverages may be liable for injuries caused by an intoxicated patron only if, at the time of service, it was apparent to the provider that the recipient was obviously intoxicated to the extent he presented a clear danger to himself and others, and that intoxication was a proximate cause of the injury. The Act provides a statutory "safe harbor"/trained-server defense for employers whose servers completed an approved training program.

D. Wrongful Death and Survival

TX Rule: Texas provides two distinct statutory causes of action for death (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code ch. 71). The wrongful-death action belongs to the decedent's surviving spouse, children, and parents and compensates their losses (lost support, companionship, mental anguish). The survival action belongs to the decedent's estate and recovers the damages the decedent could have recovered had he lived (the decedent's own pain and suffering, medical expenses, and funeral costs). Keeping these two straight—whose loss, whose claim—is a recurring practice and TLC point.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: On a generic MBE/MEE torts question, apply the uniform default (often pure comparative negligence and uncapped damages) unless the facts supply a different rule. Reserve the 51% bar, the med-mal noneconomic cap, the dram-shop "obviously intoxicated/clear danger" standard, and the wrongful-death/survival split for Texas-specific contexts.

TX BAR TIP: The two highest-yield Texas tort facts for practice and the TLC are the 51% bar (more-than-50%-at-fault claimants recover nothing) and the wrongful-death-vs-survival distinction (survivors' losses vs. the estate's/decedent's losses). Get those cold.

VI. TEXAS PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

The MPRE and the UBE test the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Texas, however, is governed in practice by the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct (TDRPC), which diverge from the Model Rules in several notable spots—knowledge that matters for the TLC and for actually practicing.

A. Where the Texas Rules Differ

TX Rule: Texas has historically not adopted several Model Rule provisions wholesale, and its numbering and substance differ. Key divergences worth knowing:

Confidentiality. The TDRPC (Rule 1.05) frames confidentiality in terms of both "confidential information" and "unprivileged client information," and its permissive disclosure exceptions are drafted differently from Model Rule 1.6—including disclosure to prevent a client from committing a criminal or fraudulent act. Texas's exceptions are generally permissive ("may reveal") rather than mandatory.

Conflicts and imputation. Texas's conflict rules (TDRPC 1.06–1.09) and especially its approach to screening to cure imputed conflicts differ from the Model Rules; Texas has been more restrictive about non-consensual screening of laterally moving lawyers than the current Model Rule 1.10 allows.

Reporting misconduct. Texas (TDRPC 8.03) requires reporting another lawyer's violation that raises a substantial question as to honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness, but the contours and the self-reporting nuances differ from Model Rule 8.3.

Advertising and solicitation. Texas maintains its own detailed advertising-and-solicitation rules (TDRPC Part VII), including filing/review requirements for certain lawyer advertisements that have no Model Rule analogue.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: On the UBE and MPRE, answer professional-responsibility questions under the ABA Model Rules—do not apply Texas variations, because the standardized exams test the model framework. Recognize the TDRPC only as Texas practice/TLC material.

TX BAR TIP: For the TLC, focus on the few areas where Texas genuinely departs from the Model Rules: the confidentiality framework of Rule 1.05 (confidential vs. unprivileged information; permissive disclosure), Texas's stricter stance on screening lateral conflicts, and Texas's distinctive advertising/solicitation review regime. Those are the differences most likely to surface and most likely to catch a lawyer trained only on the Model Rules.

VII. TEXAS CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE (BRIEF NOTE)

Texas substantive criminal law lives in the Texas Penal Code and Texas criminal procedure in the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, both of which depart from the common-law definitions in places (Texas's culpable-mental-state scheme—intentional, knowing, reckless, criminally negligent—and its offense grading are statutory). As noted above, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is the court of last resort for criminal matters, a structural distinction unique to Texas (and Oklahoma).

But for the bar exam, this matters little. The MBE's Criminal Law and Procedure questions test uniform/common-law substantive criminal law and federal constitutional criminal procedure—Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendment doctrine (search and seizure, Miranda, confrontation, right to counsel, double jeopardy). None of that turns on the Texas Penal Code. Treat Texas criminal statutes as practice/TLC knowledge, not exam doctrine.

ESSAY WRITING TIP: Answer all bar-exam criminal questions on common-law/MPC substantive principles and federal constitutional criminal procedure. Never reach for a Texas Penal Code grading or mens-rea definition on the MBE—it is tested on the uniform framework.

TX BAR TIP: For practice and the TLC, the highest-yield Texas-criminal points are the four statutory culpable mental states and the two-high-court structure (criminal appeals end at the Court of Criminal Appeals, not the Supreme Court of Texas). The detailed Penal Code offense definitions are practice knowledge you build after licensure.

VIII. TEXAS DISTINCTIONS CHECKLIST

1. Texas is a UBE state (since Feb. 2021). Exam = MBE (50%) + MEE (30%) + MPT (20%); the substance tested is national/uniform law, and the score is portable. Minimum UBE score for Texas: 270.
2. Texas Law Component (TLC). A separate, online, pass/fail Texas-specific course/assessment required for licensure; it does not affect the UBE score. All the "Texas-tested" subjects below live here now.
3. Community property. All property on hand is presumed community; separate property (rebuttable only by clear and convincing evidence) is limited to pre-marriage property, gift/devise/descent, and personal-injury recovery. Income from separate property is community.
4. Inception of title fixes an asset's character when first acquired; later community payments create reimbursement claims, not ownership changes.
5. Commingling/tracing. Mixed funds are presumed community; the separate claimant must trace, aided by the community-out-first presumption.
6. "Just and right" division. Divorce courts divide only the community estate (not necessarily 50/50) and cannot divest a spouse of separate property.
7. Marital property agreements. Premarital agreements, partition/exchange agreements, and community-conversion agreements can change the default characterization if executed with the required formalities.
8. Texas procedure devices with no clean federal twin: verified denials (TRCP 93), special exceptions with a repleader right (TRCP 91), and the no-evidence summary judgment burden-shift (TRCP 166a(i)).
9. Discovery levels (1/2/3) and control plans (TRCP 190) assigned at the outset; plea to the jurisdiction commonly disposes of sovereign-immunity cases.
10. Two courts of last resort: Supreme Court of Texas (civil) and Court of Criminal Appeals (criminal).
11. Limitations: 2 years for personal injury/torts; 4 years for contract, fraud, and debt.
12. Homestead. Constitutionally protected from forced sale except for a short list of permitted liens; acreage-based (urban 10; rural 100 single / 200 family), value generally unlimited. Spousal joinder required to convey/encumber.
13. Recording act (Tex. Prop. Code § 13.001) is a notice statute—the BFP without notice prevails; recording first is not what controls.
14. Proportionate responsibility (ch. 33): modified comparative with a 51% bar—claimants more than 50% at fault recover nothing.
15. Damages caps: $250,000 noneconomic cap in med-mal claims (economic damages uncapped); statutory exemplary-damages cap (§ 41.008).
16. Dram shop / wrongful death & survival: dram-shop liability requires service to one "obviously intoxicated" presenting a clear danger; wrongful-death recovers survivors' losses, survival recovers the decedent's/estate's losses.
17. Professional responsibility: the UBE/MPRE test the ABA Model Rules; Texas practice follows the TDRPC, which differs on confidentiality (Rule 1.05), screening of lateral conflicts, and advertising/solicitation.
18. Criminal law: the MBE tests uniform/common-law substance and federal constitutional procedure; the Texas Penal Code's four culpable mental states and offense grading are practice/TLC knowledge, not exam doctrine.