X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Appellees were city employees. The city administered a random drug test on each appellee, and each appellee tested positive for a controlled substance. As a result, appellees resigned from their respective positions with the city. A news story concerning appellees’ test results and resignations aired on KGBT-TV, a local television station. Appellees then filed the underlying suit alleging that the city improperly disclosed confidential and private information relating to them to the news media in violation of the Texas Medical Practice Act and Article I, ��8 and 19 of the Texas Constitution. Appellant filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over appellees’ claims. The trial court denied appellant’s plea to the jurisdiction. HOLDING:The court reverses the trial court’s order on the issue of prospective injunctive relief and remands the claim for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. The trial court’s order is affirmed in all other respects. Appellees alleged that appellant violated �159.002 of the Act. Although the act itself does not contain a waiver of governmental immunity, appellees argue that appellant, nonetheless, has waived its immunity from suit because �3 of its charter clearly and unambiguously states that it “may sue and be sued.” Such clear and unambiguous language in a city charter constitutes a waiver of a city’s governmental immunity. Therefore, the appellant is not immune from suit under the act. Thus, the trial court did not err in denying appellant’s plea to the jurisdiction in this respect. The appellant contends that appellees’ constitutional claims are prohibited because the Texas Constitution does not provide for monetary damages for violations of article I, ��8 and 19. A request for money damages does not affect the jurisdiction of the trial court over a claim of a violation of Article I, �19, even though there is no right to a money judgment for such a violation. Nueces County v. Ferguson, 97 S.W.3d 205 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi 2002, no pet.) The court concludes that Ferguson also applies to a violation of Article I, �8. Therefore, even assuming, without determining, that appellees sought monetary damages in addition to equitable relief for the alleged constitutional violations, the trial court’s subject matter jurisdiction over appellees’ constitutional claims was not affected. Thus, the trial court properly denied appellant’s plea to the jurisdiction in this respect. The appellant challenges the trial court’s subject matter jurisdiction. Absent allegations of fact showing a probable injury, a court is without jurisdiction to grant the injunctive relief requested. Appellees failed to plead such facts. As a result, appellees’ petition failed to affirmatively demonstrate the trial court’s jurisdiction over their claim for prospective injunctive relief. However, because appellees’ petition does not demonstrate an incurable defect in the court’s jurisdiction with respect to this claim, appellees should be allowed to amend their petition to state a claim for prospective injunctive relief. Appellant contends that the trial court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over appellees’ injunctive relief claims because appellees were required to sue an individual in authority rather than the city itself and failed to do so. The court distinguishes Bagg v. Univ. of Tex. Med. Branch at Galveston, 726 S.W.2d 582 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, writ ref’d n.r.e.). The appellant is a city, not a state agency. Furthermore, the court finds no authority extending the Bagg holding to a claim for injunctive relief against a city. The appellant’s reliance on Bagg is misplaced, and Bagg does not support its assertion. OPINION:Rodriguez, J.; Valdez, C.J., Rodriguez and Garza, J.J.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.