Patel v. City of Everman
361 S.W.3d 600
Tex.2012Background
- Patel owned twenty buildings in Everman; the City deemed fifteen substandard and subject to demolition after hearings, with an agreed order to bring fifteen into compliance; Patel failed to comply and the City proceeded to demolish all twenty after another hearing; Patel sued to stop demolition and to pursue takings claims, but nonsuited the case; Patel later sued in state court alleging an unconstitutional taking and the trial court granted summary judgment for the City; the court of appeals affirmed as to fifteen buildings and remanded as to four demolished buildings not subject to the order; on remand the City prevailed again, holding Patel's failure to pursue an administrative appeal barred the takings claim; Patel then sued in federal court and state court again, but the dispositive issue on review concerns collateral estoppel from the administrative nuisance determination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether collateral estoppel bars Patel’s takings claim. | Patel contends he should be allowed to bring a separate takings claim. | City contends Patel nonsuited the administrative case and failed to pursue review, triggering collateral estoppel. | Yes, collateral estoppel bars the takings claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Dallas v. Stewart, 361 S.W.3d 562 (Tex. 2012) (exhaustion of remedies required for takings claims in administrative proceedings)
- City of Dallas v. VSC, 347 S.W.3d 231 (Tex. 2011) (litigant must exhaust statutory remedies; cannot separately pursue takings in another proceeding)
- Patel v. City of Everman, 275 F.3d 46 (5th Cir. 2001) (federal takings claim arising from demolition; affirmed summary judgment for City)