TBCblog

Comprehensive coverage of the Texas Business Court

Operated by

Reese Marketos LLP

Dallas, Texas  ·  Complex Commercial Litigation

← The Bench
Portrait of Hon. Brian Stagner

Hon. Brian Stagner

Judge · Seat 8B

Texas Business Court · Eighth Business Court Division (Fort Worth)

Biography

Judge Brian Stagner serves on the Texas Business Court for the Eighth Division, located in Fort Worth, Texas. Before his appointment to the bench, Judge Stagner practiced law for 27 years at Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP, where he served as partner and co-chair of the firm’s Litigation Practice Group. During this time, he handled complex business litigation in more than 40 states, representing clients on both sides of the docket. His practice included corporate governance disputes, unfair business practices, e-commerce, insurance coverage, taxation, consumer class actions, and intellectual property matters. Judge Stagner has been listed in The Best Lawyers in America® annually since 2010. In addition to his judicial duties, Judge Stagner is an adjunct professor at Texas Christian University, where he teaches Business Law. He is a former Barrister of the American Inns of Court and is a sustaining Life Fellow of the Texas Bar Foundation, as well as a Fellow of the Tarrant County Bar Foundation. Judge Stagner earned his law degree, summa cum laude, from Texas Tech University School of Law, where he served on the Law Review and was named to the Order of the Coif. He also holds a Bachelor of Business Administration in Management from Angelo State University. Judge Stagner and his wife, Amy, have been happily married for 30 years and are proud parents of two daughters, Claire and Katie.

Source: txcourts.gov

Opinions by Judge Stagner (1)

Business Court Jurisdiction ×
2026 Tex. Bus. 23 Jurisdiction & Remand May 08, 2026

Removal Deadline Under Section 25A.006(f)(2) Is Not a Prohibition on Early Removal During Pending TI Application

In Aspire Commercial v. Stephenson, the Business Court of Texas denied a motion to remand filed by defendant Christopher Stephenson, who argued that removal was premature while a temporary injunction application remained pending in district court. The court's ruling addresses the timing of removal when TI applications are under advisement and the standards for establishing the $5 million jurisdictional threshold.

Mem. Op. Removal & Remand Section 25A.006 Amount in Controversy Temporary Injunction TUTSA Opinion PDF ↓