law-governmental entitities-state-agencies | local government entities | lawsuits against universities |
governmental immunity |
TEXAS SUPREME COURT OPINIONS: GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY LAW
TxDoI v. Reconveyance Services, Inc., No. 07-0786 (Tex. Mar. 12, 2010)(per curiam)
(sovereign and governmental immunity, plaintiff should have brought ultra vires claim against agency official,
agency itself enjoys sovereign immunity, government entity entitled to grant of plea to the jurisdition)
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE v. RECONVEYANCE SERVICES, INC.; from Travis County; 3rd district
(03-06-00313-CV, 240 SW3d 418, 08-31-07)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without hearing
oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and renders judgment.
Per Curiam Opinion [pdf]
El Paso Hospital District v. Texas Health and Humans Services Comm., No. 05-0372 (Tex. Feb. 22,
2008)(Substitute opinion by Justice David Medina) (agency authority)
EL PASO HOSPITAL DISTRICT D/B/A R.E. THOMASON GENERAL HOSPITAL DISTRICT, ET AL. v. TEXAS
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION AND DON GILBERT, COMMISSIONER; from Travis County; 3rd
district (03-03-00770-CV, 161 S.W.3d 587, 01/21/05)
motion for rehearing granted
opinion and judgment issued August 31, 2007, withdrawn
The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to the trial court.
Justice Medina delivered the opinion of the Court.
PETITIONS DENIED BY THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT
07-0677 METROCARE EMS, L.P. v. STATE OF TEXAS, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR DIVISION OF
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES; from Jefferson
County; 9th district (09-07-00010-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 06-07-07, pet denied Feb. 2008)
(governmental entities, sovereign immunity)
From all of the above-discussed jurisdictional evidence, we conclude that MetroCare's declaratory judgment
action is, in fact, a suit against the State for purported contractual reimbursement for which the State has not
waived sovereign immunity. We further conclude that MetroCare has failed to plead and prove the appropriate
requisite intent so as to raise a fact question on whether the State engaged in a "taking" of any
MetroCare-owned property under its eminent domain powers. See Miranda, 133 S.W.3d at 227-28. Because
an eminent-domain type of taking by the State has not been shown, the State is not subject to suit under article
I, section 17 of the Texas Constitution. The trial court erred in denying the State's plea to the jurisdiction.
Therefore, we reverse the trial court's order denying the State's plea to the jurisdiction and dismiss the cause
for lack of jurisdiction.
07-0117 STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY v. TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY; (Dissenting
Opinion by Justice Keyes) from Harris County; 1st district (01-05-00758-CV, 212 SW3d 893, 01-11-07, pet.
denied Feb 2008) (Justice O'Neill not sitting)(sovereign immunity, waiver by conduct approved,
lawsuits against universities)
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEM, THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS, AND ROBERT LOVITT v.
GURUMURTHY KALYANARAM; from Dallas County; 5th district (05-05-01493-CV, 230 SW3d 921, 08-07-07,
pet. denied Jan 2008) (public employment, assertion of immunity, dismissal of claim for breach of settlement