Oncor Electric Delivery Co. v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit
369 S.W.3d 845
Tex.2012Background
- Oncor sought to condemn a 0.37 acre easement across the Dallas County rail line owned by the Authorities to build a PUC-approved transmission line.
- The Authorities, governmental entities immune from suit, challenged Oncor's condemnation under Tex. Util. Code § 181.004.
- The court of appeals held governmental immunity barred condemnation and did not find § 181.004 a waiver.
- House Bill 971 added Tex. Util. Code § 37.053(d), extending an electric corporation’s power to condemn certain public land not state-owned with PUC approval.
- Oncor requested vacatur of the appellate judgment to consider the new statute; the Authorities urged prospective application and lack of immunity waiver.
- The Supreme Court concluded § 37.053(d) waives immunity and applies in this case, vacating the appellate judgment and remanding for proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does § 37.053(d) waive immunity for condemnation? | Oncor: yes, § 37.053(d) expressly waives immunity. | Authorities: no clear waiver; requires prospective application and state ownership considerations. | Waiver found; § 37.053(d) applies and waives immunity. |
| Is § 37.053(d) retroactive in this case? | Oncor: immediate effect; retroactive by operation in pending proceedings. | Authorities: may violate retroactivity if applied to pre-enactment actions. | Statute applies retroactively in pending proceedings; not violative of retroactivity. |
| Does the 'land owned by the state' exception apply to Authorities? | Oncor: exception does not preserve immunity for state-derived authorities. | Authorities: exception extends to entities with State-immunity. | Exception does not apply to the Authorities; does not swallow the statute. |
Key Cases Cited
- Welch v. State, 148 S.W.2d 876 (Tex. 1941) (legislative waiver of immunity must be clear and unambiguous)
- Tooke v. City of Mexia, 197 S.W.3d 325 (Tex. 2006) (presumption of prospective statute operation; retroactivity concerns)
- Barfield v. City of LaPorte, 898 S.W.2d 292 (Tex. 1995) (situs and scope considerations in eminent domain vs. immunity)
- University of Texas Southwestern Med. Ctr. at Dallas v. Estate of Arancibia, 324 S.W.3d 544 (Tex. 2010) (statutory interpretation and retroactivity considerations)
- Monsanto Co. v. Cornerstones Mun. Util. Dist., 865 S.W.2d 937 (Tex. 1993) (statutory waivers and immunity frameworks)