Texas Ass'n of Appraisal Districts v. Hart
382 S.W.3d 587
Tex. App.2012Background
- TAAD is a non-profit that licenses its members, including public entities, to receive services in exchange for dues and course-related revenues; PTEC is a non-profit that licenses educational materials to sponsors, including public entities, with revenue from licensing; Hart sought 2007–2010 financial records under the PIA; TAAD and PTEC refused, district court ordered TAAD to disclose while dismissing PTEC claim; the court applied Kneeland to analyze whether TAAD/PTEC are “governmental bodies”; the court deferred to the Attorney General’s interpretation of the statute; TAAD and Hart appeal the district court’s rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are TAAD and PTEC governmental bodies under the PIA? | Hart argues both are government bodies due to public funds/relations. | TAAD and PTEC contend neither falls within the “governmental body” definition. | TAAD not a governmental body; PTEC not a governmental body. |
| Does Hart deserve attorney’s fees under the PIA? | Hart substantially prevailed and should recover fees. | Neither TAAD nor PTEC were governmental bodies; no prevailing party. | Hart not entitled to attorney’s fees. |
| What framework governs the governmental-body analysis? | Kneeland framework should apply to private entities receiving public funds. | AG interpretations may be considered, but TAAD/PTEC not governmental bodies. | Kneeland framework adopted; first prong is primary test; deference to AG interpretations. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kneeland v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass’n, 850 F.2d 228 (5th Cir. 1988) (private entity not governmental simply for providing services under contract; Kneeland framework applied)
- City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 22 S.W.3d 351 (Tex. 2000) (statutory construction and purposes of PIA; liberal disclosure)
- Entergy Gulf States, Inc. v. Summers, 282 S.W.3d 433 (Tex. 2009) (statutory interpretation and aids in PIA context)
- Texas Citizens for a Safe Future & Clean Water v. Railroad Comm’n, 336 S.W.3d 619 (Tex. 2011) (agency deference in statutory interpretation)
- Abbott v. City of Corpus Christi, 109 S.W.3d 113 (Tex.App.-Austin 2003) (consideration of AG interpretations in PIA)
- Rainbow Grp. Ltd. v. Texas Emp’t Comm’n, 897 S.W.2d 946 (Tex.App.-Austin 1995) (agency deference in PIA context)
- Jackson v. State Office of Admin. Hearings, 351 S.W.3d 290 (Tex. 2011) (construction of PIA and public information rights)
- Mega Child Care, Inc. v. Texas Department of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 145 S.W.3d 170 (Tex. 2004) (AG guidance on longstanding PIA interpretations)