Thomas Florence v. Kaityln Mire, Javaris Miller, and Robert Stivers
12-16-00204-CV
| Tex. App. | Oct 18, 2017Background
- Thomas Florence, a TDCJ inmate, sued three TDCJ employees individually and in their official capacities, alleging denial of access to courts and procedural due process.
- Florence filed a Step 1 grievance about a disciplinary investigation; he refiled with a corrected case number and received the form returned unprocessed with markings that it was "not grievable" and "redundant," pointing to another grievance number.
- Appellees moved to dismiss under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code Chapter 14, arguing Florence failed to satisfy Chapter 14 procedures and his claims were frivolous.
- The trial court dismissed the suit with prejudice for noncompliance with Chapter 14.
- On appeal Florence argued he had exhausted administrative remedies, appellees waived immunity, and defendants acted outside their authority or in bad faith; he sought remand.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed de novo whether the suit had an arguable basis in law given no fact hearing, and whether dismissal with prejudice was proper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal under Chapter 14 was an abuse of discretion | Florence: he complied with Chapter 14 and exhausted administrative remedies | Appellees: Florence failed to exhaust administrative remedies; claim frivolous | Affirmed dismissal — no abuse of discretion |
| Whether Florence exhausted the TDCJ grievance process | Florence: he filed grievances and corrected errors; exhaustion satisfied | Appellees: he did not obtain a final written decision from the highest grievance authority as required | Not exhausted — failure bars judicial review |
| Whether the dismissal with prejudice was improper because error could be cured by repleading | Florence: dismissal with prejudice was improper; error could be remedied | Appellees: exhaustion failure cannot be cured by more specific pleading | Dismissal with prejudice proper because lack of exhaustion is incurable by pleading |
Key Cases Cited
- Leachman v. Dretke, 261 S.W.3d 297 (Tex. App.−Fort Worth 2008) (discusses Chapter 14 dismissal and exhaustion requirement)
- Hamilton v. Pechacek, 319 S.W.3d 801 (Tex. App.−Fort Worth 2010) (standard of review for Chapter 14 dismissal and when review focuses on arguable basis in law)
- Johnson v. Lynaugh, 796 S.W.2d 705 (Tex. 1990) (court may affirm on any correct legal theory)