This year, Texas enacted a procedural change with notable consequences for companies and individuals affected by litigation beyond the state’s borders. Effective August 31, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court adopted the Uniform Interstate Depositions and Discovery Act (“UIDDA”), bringing Texas in alignment with the procedural framework already used by the vast majority of U.S. jurisdictions. Through the creation of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure (“TRCP”) 201.3, Texas effects a major change in how out-of-state subpoenas and interstate discovery will be handled in future proceedings.
Texas Was a Subpoena Outlier
For decades, Texas maintained a more formal and onerous approach to handling foreign subpoenas. Parties seeking discovery here were required to first initiate a miscellaneous proceeding in a Texas court, secure involvement of local counsel, and navigate various procedural hurdles. The UIDDA replaces that framework with a more streamlined, straightforward administrative process.
Changes for Out-of-State Subpoenas
Under new Rule 201.3, an attorney involved in litigation pending in another jurisdiction may now present the out-of-state subpoena to a Texas court clerk. The clerk, in turn, issues a Texas subpoena that reflects the terms of the original. From that point on, all aspects of compliance (service, objections, protective orders, and enforcement) proceed under Texas law and within Texas courts. This means that TRCP 176 governs service and enforcement, Texas’s proportionality standards under Rule 192.4 still apply, and burdens, deadlines, and protections are assessed according to Texas discovery rules. Likewise, Texas’s unique procedures for protecting confidential information, trade secrets, and privileged materials under Rule 192.6 remain fully in effect. And, significantly, any disputes related to the foreign subpoena must be resolved in the Texas county where discovery is to occur.
Corporate representative depositions and document requests also remain subject to Texas rules. A UIDDA subpoena seeking, for example, an FRCP 30(b)(6)-style deposition must satisfy Texas Rule 199.2(b)(1), and document requests must follow Texas formatting and timing requirements. Thus, while the initial steps of domesticating a subpoena have become considerably easier, the substantive protections and procedural expectations to which Texas litigants are accustomed remain firmly in place.
Texas Conforms to National Subpoena Standards
Texas was one of the last hold outs of the UIDDA and its adoption places the state within the overwhelming national majority that follows the framework. Enacted in 2007, the UIDDA has now been adopted by nearly every U.S. jurisdiction, leaving only Massachusetts and Missouri as the remaining non-adopters. Texas’ adoption of the UIDDA should ease much of the confusion that once surrounded out-of-state subpoenas. The process is now simpler and more consistent, especially for those who rarely encounter such requests. It will help create predictability for businesses that operate in interstate environments, reduce procedural friction, and ensure that Texans who find themselves connected to litigation elsewhere respond to subpoenas under a familiar set of rules.
Farnaz Alms and Stacey Norstrud are members of Kean Miller’s Offshore Energy & Marine group, practicing in the firm’s Houston office. The team represents a wide range of clients in litigation, transactions, and regulatory matters involving offshore oil and gas exploration, decommissioning, drilling activities, barges, tugs and towage, marine insurance, and other maritime and energy related matters.