CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. 03-01-00491-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 11, 2002

West Orange-Cove Consolidated Independent School District Coppell Independent School District La Porte Independent School District And Port Neches-Groves Independent School District v. Felipe Alanis, Texas Commissioner of Education The Texas Education Agency Carol Keeton Rylander, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts And the Texas State Board of Education Alvarado I.S.D. Anthony I.S.D. Aubrey I.S.D. Bangs I.S.D.

Four Texas school districts, led by West Orange-Cove Consolidated Independent School District, appealed the dismissal of their action seeking a declaratory judgment that the state's school finance system is unconstitutional. The districts contended that the $1.50 tax cap had become a de facto floor, forcing them to tax at the maximum allowable rate to provide education, thereby constituting an unconstitutional state ad valorem tax. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, ruling that the districts failed to state a viable cause of action because they did not allege they were forced to tax at the cap specifically to provide the constitutionally-mandated 'accredited education.' The court also found the claim unripe, emphasizing that the focus should be on whether the state's requirements forced a lack of meaningful discretion in setting tax rates for an accredited education, not on a desired level of education or the number of districts taxing at the cap.

School Finance ReformConstitutional ChallengeAd Valorem TaxationEducation FundingDeclaratory JudgmentAppellate JurisdictionRipeness DoctrineTexas Constitution Article VII, Section 1Texas Constitution Article VIII, Section 1-eProperty Tax Cap
References
30
Case No. 03-01-00103-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 24, 2003

HEB Ministries, Inc. Southern Bible Institute And Hispanic Bible Institute/Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and Commissioner Don W. Brown v. Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and Commissioner Don W. Brown/HEB Ministries, Inc.

HEB Ministries, Inc., operating Tyndale Theological Seminary, challenged the constitutionality of Texas Education Code provisions requiring private postsecondary institutions to obtain state certification or accreditation for granting degrees and using terms like "seminary." The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board counterclaimed for injunctions and administrative penalties. The district court found the degree-granting regulation constitutional but the "seminary" term regulation unconstitutional. The Court of Appeals affirmed the constitutionality of the degree-granting regulation and upheld the $170,000 penalty. It reversed the district court's finding on the "seminary" term, declaring it constitutional, and reinstated a $3,000 penalty, remanding for a permanent injunction consistent with its opinion.

ConstitutionalityFirst AmendmentFree Exercise ClauseEstablishment ClauseFree Speech ClauseTexas Education CodeHigher Education RegulationDegree-Granting AuthorityAccreditation StandardsReligious Educational Institutions
References
43
Case No. C.A. No. H-78-1831 (Consolidated Multidistrict Litigation)
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 05, 1980

In Re Alien Children Education Litigation

This case addresses the constitutionality of Texas Education Code Ann. tit. 2, § 21.031, which prohibited the use of state funds to educate undocumented children and allowed local school districts to exclude them or charge tuition. Plaintiffs, undocumented school-age children, argued the statute violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, was preempted by federal law, and conflicted with international law. Judge SEALS of the Southern District of Texas found the statute unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause. The court determined that access to education is a fundamental right, and the statute imposed an absolute deprivation of this right on undocumented children, who are "persons within the jurisdiction" of the state. The state's arguments regarding fiscal integrity and deterrence of immigration were found not to be compelling governmental interests. The court issued a permanent injunction against the Commissioner of Education, preventing the implementation of the challenged sections of the Texas Education Code.

Undocumented ChildrenPublic Education AccessEqual Protection ClauseFourteenth AmendmentState Statute UnconstitutionalityImmigration Status DiscriminationFundamental Rights (Education)Judicial ScrutinyFiscal Policy (State)Class Action
References
15
Case No. 03-10-00644-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 25, 2013

Energy Education of Montana, Inc. v. Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts and the Attorney General of Texas

Energy Education of Montana, Inc. (EEM) filed a tax refund suit against the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts and the Attorney General of Texas, seeking to recover use tax paid on an airplane. EEM argued for an exemption under tax code section 151.328(a)(4), claiming the aircraft was purchased for registration and use outside Texas. The district court denied EEM's motion and granted the Comptroller's summary judgment. On appeal, the court affirmed the district court's decision, holding that the exemption applies only to aircraft purchased in Texas and does not create a use-tax exemption. Consequently, EEM was found not entitled to the aircraft exemption.

TexasTax LawUse TaxSales TaxAircraft ExemptionSummary JudgmentStatutory ConstructionAppellate ReviewTax RefundComptroller of Public Accounts
References
33
Case No. 03-23-00279-CV
Regular Panel Decision
May 21, 2025

Mike Morath, in His Official Capacity as Commissioner of Education for the Texas Education Agency v. Texas State Teachers Association

The Texas Court of Appeals reviewed a challenge brought by the Texas State Teachers Association (TSTA) against Mike Morath, Commissioner of Education, concerning the validity of administrative Rule 97.1075(c)(1). TSTA contended that the rule, which grants "final" and "sole" authority to operating partners over district employees assigned to charter schools, infringed upon teachers' statutory rights. The trial court sided with TSTA, declaring the entire subsection invalid. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the invalidation of parts (C) and (D) of the rule, agreeing they improperly curtailed teachers' rights by making decisions unreviewable. However, the court reversed the trial court's decision regarding parts (A), (B), and (E), deeming them valid because they pertain to employees directly hired by the operating partner and do not impact the statutory protections of public school district teachers. The final ruling was affirmed in part and reversed and rendered in part.

Administrative LawEducation LawCharter SchoolsStatutory InterpretationAgency RulesTeachers' RightsTexas Education AgencySummary JudgmentAppellate ReviewRule Validity
References
10
Case No. NO . 14-0776
Regular Panel Decision
May 13, 2016

Mike Morath, Commissioner of Education, in His Official Capacity Glenn Hegar, Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, in His Official Capacity The Texas State Board of Education And the Texas Education Agency v. the Texas Taxpayer and Student Fairness Coalition Calhoun County Isd Edgewood Isd Fort Bend Isd Texas Charter School Association And Joyce Coleman

The Supreme Court of Texas reviewed multiple challenges to the constitutionality of the state's public school finance system. Plaintiffs, including various school districts and associations, alleged the system violated constitutional requirements for adequacy, suitability, and financial efficiency, and imposed a statewide ad valorem tax. Reversing the trial court's extensive findings, the Supreme Court held that despite its imperfections, the school funding regime met minimum constitutional requirements. The Court emphasized its deferential standard of review, stating that it would not usurp legislative authority by dictating policy changes, and remanded the issue of attorney fees.

School FinanceTexas ConstitutionEducation SystemAdequacySuitabilityFinancial EfficiencyStatewide Ad Valorem TaxJudicial ReviewLegislative DiscretionStudent Achievement
References
20
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Education Agency v. Maxwell

This case involves the constitutionality of former TEX.EDUC.CODE § 35.030, which mandated confidentiality for TAAS tests and prevented parents from viewing them. Larry Maxwell and other parents sued the Texas Education Agency and other defendants, asserting violations of their constitutional rights, particularly their fundamental right to direct their children's upbringing and education. The trial court initially found the statute unconstitutional and issued an injunction. However, while the appeal was pending, the legislature repealed Section 35.030, rendering the core constitutional issue moot. The appellate court vacated the injunction as moot but reversed and remanded the case to the trial court for a hearing on attorney's fees, finding that the plaintiffs were prevailing parties under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1988 despite the mootness of the primary issue.

Parental RightsEducation LawConstitutional LawFirst AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentMootness DoctrineAttorney's FeesCivil RightsTexas Education CodeTAAS Tests
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Heb Ministries, Inc. v. Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board

HEB Ministries, Inc. (operating Tyndale Theological Seminary and Biblical Institute) challenged the constitutionality of Texas Education Code provisions requiring private postsecondary institutions to obtain a certificate or accreditation to grant degrees (§ 61.304) or use terms like “seminary” (§ 61.313(a)(1)). The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board sought enforcement due to Tyndale’s non-compliance based on religious beliefs. The district court upheld the degree-granting regulation but found the “seminary” regulation unconstitutional. This appellate court affirmed the constitutionality of the degree-granting regulation and its penalties, while reversing the district court's finding on the “seminary” regulation, deeming it constitutional and reinstating its penalty. The case was remanded for a permanent injunction.

Constitutional LawFirst AmendmentFreedom of ReligionFreedom of SpeechTexas Education CodeHigher Education RegulationAccreditationDegree-Granting AuthorityReligious FreedomDeclaratory Judgment Action
References
72
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Honors Acad., Inc. v. Tex. Educ. Agency

The Supreme Court of Texas affirmed the vacation of temporary injunctions and dismissal of a lawsuit brought by American YouthWorks, Inc. (AYW) and Honors Academy, Inc. (Honors), two open-enrollment charter schools. The schools challenged the Commissioner of Education's decision to revoke their charters due to sustained unacceptable academic and financial performance, as mandated by the Texas Education Code. The Court held that charter schools, as governmental entities, do not possess a vested property right in their charters, thus rejecting due process and contract impairment claims. Furthermore, the Court dismissed ultra vires claims, ruling that the Commissioner's interpretation and application of the relevant statutory provisions were within his broad authority, especially considering legislative intent to limit judicial review of such administrative decisions.

Charter School RevocationOpen-Enrollment Charter SchoolsSovereign ImmunityUltra ViresDue ProcessContract ClauseVested Property RightsTexas Education CodeAcademic AccountabilityFinancial Accountability
References
44
Case No. Nos. 03-14-00283-CV and 03-14-00360-CV
Regular Panel Decision

Texas Education Agency and Mike Morath, Commissioner of Education, in His Official Capacity v. American Youthworks, Inc., D/B/A American Youthworks Charter School Honors Academy, Inc., D/B/A Honors Academy And Azleway Inc., D/B/A Azleway Charter School

This case involves an appeal by the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and Commissioner of Education Mike Morath against temporary injunctions granted to three charter holders: American YouthWorks, Inc., Honors Academy, Inc., and Azleway, Inc. The charter holders sued after the Commissioner initiated charter revocation proceedings under new 2013 legislation targeting underperforming open-enrollment charter schools. The district court had temporarily enjoined further revocation actions. The appellate court examined whether the charter holders' claims, including constitutional and ultra vires assertions, could overcome sovereign immunity and invoke the district court's inherent jurisdiction, given statutory prohibitions on judicial review. The court ultimately concluded that the pleadings did not sufficiently invoke such inherent jurisdiction, and thus, the claims were barred by sovereign immunity, leading to the vacating of the injunctions and dismissal of the suits.

Education LawCharter SchoolsCharter RevocationAdministrative LawJudicial ReviewSovereign ImmunitySubject-Matter JurisdictionTemporary InjunctionsDeclaratory ReliefUltra Vires Claims
References
71
Showing 1-10 of 10,386 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational