Morgan Security Consulting, LLC D/B/A North East Texas Tactical and Paul McCoy D/B/A Texas Tactical Shooter v. Kaufman County, Texas
397 S.W.3d 248
Tex. App.2013Background
- Morgan Security and Paul McCoy appeal the trial court’s interim injunction against operating a sport shooting range near residences.
- Kaufman County filed an amended petition and TRO request under Chapter 128, alleging noncompliance with industry standards.
- County attached an NRA Range Manual expert report deeming the range a danger to neighboring property and occupants.
- The trial court granted a three-part injunction: no opening of a sport shooting range, no construction of such facilities, and no use of the property for firearms training or demonstrations.
- Pending appeal, the court abated the case based on an agreed motion, with no reinstatement or merits trial scheduled.
- The court held that appellate review of a temporary injunction is limited to whether the trial court abused its discretion, not merits, and dismissed the interlocutory appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Kaufman County may sue under the Sport Shooting Liability Act as a government entity | Morgan asserts County cannot bring suit under the Act as a governmental entity. | Kaufman County contends it may sue under the Act as a governmental entity or claimant. | Appeal dismissed; issue moot for lack of proper appellate route. |
| Whether the temporary injunction exceeded the statute's scope | Morgan contends the injunction is broader than permitted by the Act. | Kaufman County maintains the injunction was within statutory bounds. | Dispositive ruling not reached; issues must await final judgment review. |
| Whether the interlocutory appeal is appropriate given abatement and status quo | Morgan seeks appellate review concurrently with abatement to expedite merits. | Kaufman County agrees abatement was proper to preserve status quo. | Appeal dismissed; review limited to abuse of discretion on injunction. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hiss v. Great N. Am. Cos., 871 S.W.2d 218 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1993) (only issue is abuse of discretion on injunction; merits not precluded)
- Brar v. Sedey, 307 S.W.3d 916 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2010) (abstention and delay concerns; fast merits resolution preferred)
- Davis v. Huey, 571 S.W.2d 859 (Tex. 1978) (temporary injunction standard and status quo preservation)
- Iranian Muslim Org. v. City of San Antonio, 615 S.W.2d 202 (Tex. 1981) (scope of appellate review for temporary injunctions)