Berry v. Texas Democratic Party
2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 11732
| Tex. App. | 2014Background
- Texas Democratic Party (TDP) sued the Secretary of State seeking reimbursement from state primary funds for litigation expenses incurred in 2011–2012 redistricting lawsuits. TDP had filed a timely 2012 statement of estimated primary-election expenses (SEPE) but omitted any estimate for litigation expenses.
- Chapter 173 of the Texas Election Code authorizes reimbursement from primary funds for expenses “necessary for the holding of a primary election,” requires a SEPE containing an itemized estimate, and sets deadlines for SEPE submission.
- The Secretary reviewed TDP’s final expense report, denied reimbursement of the litigation expenses as not “necessary for and directly related to” the primary, and TDP sued under Tex. Elec. Code § 173.086(a) (challenge to amount approved).
- The Secretary filed a plea to the jurisdiction asserting sovereign immunity because TDP’s SEPE lacked an itemized estimate for the litigation expenses that TDP later sought to recover.
- The trial court denied the plea; on interlocutory appeal the Texas Court of Appeals analyzed whether section 173.081(b)(1)’s itemization requirement is a jurisdictional prerequisite to suit under § 173.086(a).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether filing a SEPE that omits an item/category of expense still waives sovereign immunity under § 173.086(a) | A timely SEPE satisfies § 173.086(a); § 173.081(b)(1) does not require specific categories, so omission of a category (e.g., ongoing litigation) does not bar suit | SEPE must comply with § 173.081(b)(1) (itemized estimate); omission of an item already anticipated or partially incurred means no waiver of immunity | Held: The SEPE must include an itemized estimate for any category of expense already anticipated or partially incurred at filing; TDP’s omission of litigation estimates deprived the court of jurisdiction under § 173.086(a) |
| Whether UDJA (declaratory relief) can supply jurisdiction where § 173.086 claim is barred | UDJA claim can proceed to declare Secretary violated § 173.001 and to recover attorneys’ fees | UDJA does not waive immunity; declaratory relief cannot be used to obtain money against the State when immunity bars the underlying claim | Held: UDJA relief is barred because it would effectively grant relief against the State that sovereign immunity precludes; ultra vires exception inapplicable |
| Whether mandamus (or ultra vires relief) can compel payment or consideration | Mandamus can compel Secretary to pay or at least to consider the claim on merits | Mandamus not available to compel a discretionary act; ultra vires exception does not apply where statute grants Secretary discretion | Held: Mandamus not available to compel payment or to bypass the jurisdictional SEPE requirement; Secretary’s actions were discretionary and already exercised |
| Scope of Tarrant County Democratic Party v. Steen precedent (unanticipated future expenses) | Tarrant Cnty. permits omission of truly unanticipated expenses; ongoing litigation cannot be estimated so omission should not bar suit | Distinguish Tarrant Cnty.: where expenses were anticipated or already incurred, itemization is required | Held: Court distinguishes Tarrant Cnty.; omission of wholly unanticipated expenses not decided here, but omission of estimates for expenses already incurred or anticipated is jurisdictional and bars suit |
Key Cases Cited
- Reata Constr. Corp. v. City of Dallas, 197 S.W.3d 371 (Tex. 2006) (statutory waiver of sovereign immunity must be clear and unambiguous)
- Texas Dep’t of Parks & Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217 (Tex. 2004) (subject-matter jurisdiction and when immunity questions are decided)
- Prairie View A & M Univ. v. Chatha, 381 S.W.3d 500 (Tex. 2012) (statutory prerequisites to suit and legislative control over waiver conditions)
- City of El Paso v. Heinrich, 284 S.W.3d 366 (Tex. 2009) (UDJA does not waive sovereign immunity or enlarge jurisdiction)
- Tarrant Cnty. Democratic Party v. Steen, 434 S.W.3d 188 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2014) (addressing whether SEPE must include estimates for unanticipated litigation expenses)
- First Am. Title Ins. Co. v. Combs, 258 S.W.3d 627 (Tex. 2008) (statutory construction principles)
- City of Houston v. Jackson, 192 S.W.3d 764 (Tex. 2006) (strict construction of waivers of sovereign immunity)