DJA | City of Pasadena v. Smith set for oral argument

No. 06-0948
CITY OF PASADENA, TEXAS v. RICHARD SMITH; from Harris County; 1st district (01-05-01157-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 09-14-06)

Set to be argued orally September 10, 2008 at 9:00 a.m.

Opinion below: City of Pasadena v. Smith, No. 01-05-01157-CV (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Sep. 14, 2006)(Jennings) (governmental entities law, public employment law, city, police, termination, suspension, availability of declaratory relief under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act (UDJA aka DJA), jurisdictional issue)

Disposition: AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT

From the Opinion by Justice Terry Jennings

Section 143.057(j) expressly limits judicial review of a hearing examiner’s award to situations in which the hearing examiner “was without jurisdiction or exceeded its jurisdiction [or its] order was procured by fraud, collusion, or other unlawful means.” Tex. Loc. Gov’t Code Ann. § 143.057(j).

Here, the City is not seeking an interpretation of a statute and a determination of its rights under that statute as contemplated under the DJA. Rather, it is attempting to appeal a hearing examiner’s award based on a misapplication of law. This it cannot do. Tex. Natural Res. Conservation Comm’n v. IT-Davy, 74 S.W.3d 849, 855 (Tex. 2002) (“The DJA does not extend a trial court’s jurisdiction, and a litigant’s request for declaratory relief does not confer jurisdiction on a court or change a suit’s underlying nature.”).

Accordingly, we hold that the district court did not have jurisdiction to hear the City’s appeal under the DJA.” [Declaratory Judgments Act ]

Full case style in the Houston Court of Appeals: City of Pasadena, Texas v. Richard A. Smith
Appeal from 113th District Court of Harris County (Judge Patricia Hancock)