Pablo Soliz v. State
04-14-00551-CV
| Tex. App. | Mar 11, 2015Background
- Pablo Soliz was elected Brooks County Precinct 3 constable (took office Jan 1, 2013).
- Texas law (Tex. Loc. Gov. Code §86.0021(b)) required an elected constable to present evidence of a permanent peace‑officer license to the commissioners court within 270 days of taking office; failure operates as a forfeiture of office and supports quo warranto removal.
- The State filed a quo warranto information raising three grounds; this appeal concerns only the licensure deadline ground.
- The record (affidavit of the County Judge) established Soliz did not present evidence of licensure by the 270‑day deadline; Soliz does not dispute that he failed to produce such evidence.
- The trial court granted the State’s motion for partial summary judgment on the licensure issue and entered judgment removing Soliz from office; Soliz appealed, arguing due process and factual‑issue concerns.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether summary judgment denying a jury trial violated due process | Soliz: summary judgment deprived him of a jury determination of factual disputes | State: only one factual element exists (whether evidence of licensure was presented), which is undisputed, so no jury issue | The court concluded no due process violation; no material fact for a jury |
| Whether genuine issues of material fact exist on the licensure issue | Soliz: factual circumstances/excuses for not obtaining license create fact issues | State: Soliz’s excuses amount to irrelevant affirmative defenses not found in statute; undisputed that no evidence was presented | The court held no genuine issue of material fact; summary judgment on licensure was proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Gulbenkian v. Penn, 252 S.W.2d 929 (Tex. 1952) (summary judgment determines whether fact issues exist without weighing credibility)
- MMP, Ltd. v. Jones, 710 S.W.2d 59 (Tex. 1986) (plaintiff entitled to summary judgment only if it proves all essential elements as a matter of law)
- Lear Siegler, Inc. v. Perez, 819 S.W.2d 470 (Tex. 1991) (summary judgment standard requires absence of genuine issues of material fact)
- Buck v. Palmer, 381 S.W.3d 525 (Tex. 2012) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo)
- Querner Truck Lines, Inc. v. Alta Verde Indus., Inc., 747 S.W.2d 464 (Tex. App. — San Antonio 1988, no writ) (summary judgment appropriate to avoid trials of clearly unmeritorious claims)