Summary
This document is a dissenting opinion from the Texas Fifteenth Court of Appeals addressing a petition for a writ of mandamus concerning the discovery procedures applicable to the State of Texas. The dissenting justice argues that Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 199 should not be construed to permit oral depositions of the sovereign state, emphasizing historical precedent, statutory construction, and the state's unique constitutional structure. Furthermore, the opinion details the irreconcilable ethical conflicts that would arise if the Office of the Attorney General were forced to act simultaneously as trial counsel and a deposition witness, concluding that the petitioner should instead utilize mandatory initial disclosures under Rule 194.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Texas Rule 199 authorizes the deposition of the State of Texas
- Whether mandamus relief is appropriate to compel such a deposition
Key quotations
“The State is the government, not an agency of the government.”
Factual background
Google sought to depose the State of Texas under Texas Rule 199, arguing that the State is a "person or entity" subject to deposition. The State objected, asserting that the Attorney General cannot be compelled to testify as a witness and that Rule 199 does not extend to the State as a whole.
Procedural history
The matter originated as original proceedings in Midland County (No. 15-24-00090-CV) and Victoria County, Texas, and was appealed to the Texas Fifteenth Court of Appeals.