Texas Supreme Court holds city’s civil-enforcement of utility payment ordinance was not an unconstitutional taking

  City of Baytown v Alan Schrock, 20-0309 (Tex. May 13, 2022)  In this takings case, the Texas Supreme Court held the City of Bayton (City) did not commit a taking by withholding utility service in order to collect unpaid utility bills.
Read More

U.S. Supreme Court holds Austin on-premise/off-premise sign regulation is content neutral

Special contributing author Laura Mueller, City Attorney for Dripping Springs City of Austin, Texas v. Reagan Nat’l Advert. Of Austin, LLC., et al, No. 20-1029 (April 21, 2022). The primary question in regulating off-premise signs differently than on-premise signs is whether such
Read More

Texarkana holds city properly supported its summary judgment to permanently enjoin mobile home park

Polecat Hill, LLC, et al. v. City of Longview, Texas, et al. 06-20-00062-CV (Tex. App. – Texarkana, December 2, 2021). This is a nuisance/permit case brought under Chapter 54 of the Texas Local Government Code where the Texarkana Court of Appeals affirmed
Read More

Dallas Court of Appeals holds trial court had jurisdiction for BOA appeal only, but no monetary or constitutional claims could survive the board’s plea

  City of Dallas, et al v. PDT Holdings, Inc., et al. 05-21-00018-CV  (Tex. App. – Dallas, August 24, 2021). This is an appeal from a board of adjustment decision where the Dallas Court of Appeals reversed in part and affirmed in
Read More

Fourth Court of Appeals holds plaintiff suing for BOA decision must be given opportunity to replead to show timing of when the BOA decision was filed in board’s offices

Alpha Securities, LLC, v City of Fredericksburg, 04-20-00447-CV (Tex. App. – San Antonio, Aug. 10, 2021, no pet h.). This is a board of adjustment appeal and declaratory judgment action where the San Antonio Court of Appeals agreed no jurisdiction existed, but
Read More

Texas Supreme Court holds historic preservation ordinance is not “zoning” but must still comply with certain Chapter 211 requirements

Powell, et al., v City of Houston, 19-0689 (Tex. June 4, 2021) The Texas Supreme Court determined that Houston’s Historic Preservation Ordinance was not a zoning ordinance and therefore the zoning restrictions under state law do not apply. However, certain provisions of
Read More

Property owner failed to allege Ch. 211 or 245 claims for zoning change; failure-to-exhaust-remedies bar applied to inverse-condemnation claim

  City of Dickinson v Stefan, 14-18-00778-CV, (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dis.], Oct. 27, 2020) Stefan operated his home computer business in a residential zone, but allowed his church group to host events, including weddings on the property.  The City changed
Read More

Fort Worth Court of Appeals analyzes the law-of-the-case doctrine and determines private property owners did not establish claims against a city regarding fee simple land ownership

City of Mansfield, et al., v Saverings, et al, 02-19-00174-CV (Tex. App. – Fort Worth, July 16, 2020) In this lengthy opinion, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals holds certain private property owners did not establish a right to declaratory relief regarding
Read More

San Antonio Court of Appeals affirms county’s jurisdictional challenge and award of sanctions against property owner

Kehoe v Kendall County, 04-19-00825-CV (Tex. App. – San Antonio, July 15, 2020). This is a declaratory judgment case involving a private property easement where the San Antonio Court of Appeals affirmed the City’s plea to the jurisdiction and awarded sanctions against
Read More