In Re: City of Dallas Appeal from 199th Judicial District Court of Collin County (memorandum opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DENY; and Opinion Filed February 27, 2017. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-01377-CV IN RE CITY OF DALLAS, Relator Original Proceeding from the 199th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 199-01743-99 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang, Lang-Miers, and Brown Opinion by Justice Brown This original proceeding is the second arising from lawsuits filed against the City of Dallas by current and former firefighters alleging that the City breached its contract with them regarding their pay. The underlying litigation has also resulted in three interlocutory appeals. The core issue is whether an ordinance passed in 1979 was intended to provide a one-time salary adjustment or apply to all future salary adjustments. In the current proceeding, the City complains of the trial court’s refusal to rule on the City’s motion for summary judgment and second plea to the jurisdiction. To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show both that the trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Based on the record before us, we conclude the City has not shown it is entitled to the relief requested. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a); Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 839-40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). The trial court was within its discretion to defer ruling until trial where fact issues on the merits are intertwined with the fact issues on which the plea to the jurisdiction is based. Under such circumstances, a trial court may properly reserve ruling until trial. See Tex. Dep’t of Parks & Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217, 227–28 (Tex. 2004) (holding that when disputed evidence of jurisdictional facts implicate the merits of the case, then the finder of fact must resolve the fact issues). Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. /Ada Brown/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE 161377F.P05 –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.
