Lynn Rowell, et al v. Leslie Pettijohn, No. 15-50168 (5th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on March 2, 2016.
Download PDF
Case: 15-50168 Document: 00514007108 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/25/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 15-50168 May 25, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk LYNN ROWELL, doing business as Beaumont Greenery; MICAH P. COOKSEY; MPC DATA AND COMMUNICATIONS, INCORPORATED; MARK HARKEN; NXT PROPERTIES, INCORPORATED; PAULA COOK; MONTGOMERY CHANDLER, INCORPORATED; SHONDA TOWNSLEY; TOWNSLEY DESIGNS, L.L.C., Plaintiffs - Appellants v. LESLIE L. PETTIJOHN, in her official capacity as Commissioner of the Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner of the State of Texas, Defendant - Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: In Rowell v. Pettijohn, 816 F.3d 73 (5th Cir. 2016), our court affirmed the dismissal of appellants’ challenge to Texas’ Anti-Surcharge Law, which prohibits merchants from imposing surcharges for credit-card purchases. We held the law did not implicate the First Amendment’s free-speech protections and was not unconstitutionally vague. Id. at 82, 84. Case: 15-50168 Document: 00514007108 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/25/2017 No. 15-50168 On 29 March 2017, the Supreme Court, in a similar matter, Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, 137 S. Ct. 1144 (2017), held speech was regulated and remanded to the second circuit. As a result, the Court remanded this matter to our court “for further consideration in light of Expressions Hair Design”. Rowell v. Pettijohn, No. 15-1455 (U.S. Apr. 3, 2017). Accordingly, this matter is REMANDED to district court for further proceedings consistent with Expressions Hair Design. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
