Publications

2006 Annual Survey of Texas Class Action Cases

Texas Business Litigation Journal
06.01.07

The number of cases addressing class action issues in Texas continued to drop this year. In 2006, Texas appellate courts decided only nine cases that substantively addressed Tex. R. Civ. P. 42,2 down from 13 cases decided in 2005 and 23 in 2004. In three cases, the Corpus Christi Court of Appeals approved class certification. The remaining six cases rejected certification. However, many of the opinions forged relatively new ground in exploring Rule 42(b)(3)’s predominance and superiority requirements. Despite the relatively small number of class action decisions, Texas courts continued to refine Rule 42’s application and scope in 2006.

A. Texas Supreme Court Opinions

In 2006, the Texas Supreme Court published only one opinion discussing class issues. In Cameron Appraisal Dist. v. Rourk,3 the court determined whether a class action can be used to circumvent a statutory requirement that taxpayers exhaust administrative remedies before filing a civil action.

A group of taxpayers filed suit against the Cameron Appraisal District for assessing ad valorem taxes against owners of travel trailers in the 2000 and 2001 tax years. The trial court denied certification but the court of appeals reversed. The Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals, holding that the taxpayers were required to exhaust administrative remedies before filing a class action.

Read more.

The publications contained in this site do not constitute legal advice. Legal advice can only be given with knowledge of the client's specific facts. By putting these publications on our website we do not intend to create a lawyer-client relationship with the user. Materials may not reflect the most current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. This information should in no way be taken as an indication of future results.

Search Tips:

You may use the wildcard symbol (*) as a root expander.  A search for "anti*" will find not only "anti", but also "anti-trust", "antique", etc.

Entering two terms together in a search field will behave as though an "OR" is being used.  For example, entering "Antique Motorcars" as a Client Name search will find results with either word in the Client Name.

Operators

AND and OR may be used in a search.  Note: they must be capitalized, e.g., "Project AND Finance." 

The + and - sign operators may be used.  The + sign indicates that the term immediately following is required, while the - sign indicates to omit results that contain that term. E.g., "+real -estate" says results must have "real" but not "estate".

To perform an exact phrase search, surround your search phrase with quotation marks.  For example, "Project Finance".

Searches are not case sensitive.

back to top