Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners, and Nicole Oria, in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director// Ellen Jefferson, D.V.M. v. Ellen Jefferson, D.V.M.// Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners, and Nicole Oria, in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director
03-14-00774-CV
| Tex. App. | Jul 8, 2015Background
- Jefferson holds a Texas veterinary license and operates SAPA, a no-kill shelter.
- The Board filed a complaint and disciplined proceeding related to Starlight’s care; Jefferson challenged Board rules in district court.
- District court upheld most Board rules but invalidated Board Rules 573.72 and 573.80(2), ruling they violated the Ownership Exemption and were outside the Board’s authority.
- Board sought interlocutory review of the rule challenges and cross-appeal on UDJA claims; Jefferson cross-appealed on other issues.
- Final judgment: Board rules 573.72 and 573.80(2) held contrary to the Ownership Exemption and invalid; remanded for further administrative actions; subject-matter jurisdiction issues preserved for cross-appeal.
- Appellants seek reversal of the district court’s invalidation of the two rules, arguing the rules are within the Board’s statutory authority and consistent with the Ownership Exemption.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are Rule 573.72 consistent with the Ownership Exemption? | Jefferson argues rule conflicts with Ownership Exemption. | Board asserts rule prevents evasion by shelters and aligns with Ownership Exemption. | Rule 573.72 is consistent with Ownership Exemption. |
| Is Rule 573.80(2) consistent with the Ownership Exemption? | Jefferson contends the rule creates impermissible presumptions under the Exemption. | Board maintains rule prevents non-veterinarians from evading the Act through designated caretakers. | Rule 573.80(2) is consistent with Ownership Exemption. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dodd v. Meno, 870 S.W.2d 4 (Tex. 1994) (agency authority and judicial review principles for statutory interpretation)
- Tex. Orthopaedic Ass’n v. Tex. State Bd. of Med. Exam’rs, 254 S.W.3d 714 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, pet. denied) (standard of review for agency rule validity)
- Tex. Dep’t of Human Servs. v. Christian Care Ctrs., Inc., 826 S.W.2d 715 (Tex. App.—Austin 1992, writ denied) (implied authority and public-protection rationale)
- Reliant Energy, Inc. v. Public Util. Comm’n of Tex., 62 S.W.3d 833 (Tex. App.—Austin 2001, no pet.) (deference to agency construction when reasonable)