Resendez v. Johnson

Summary

The Supreme Court of Texas dismissed the petitions for review for want of jurisdiction in an interlocutory appeal involving claims arising from alleged excessive corporal punishment of students. The court held that the cited authorities did not establish a conflict supporting jurisdiction and did not decide whether an interlocutory summary judgment triggers immunity under Texas Tort Claims Act section 101.106.

Holdings

1. The court of appeals' decision did not conflict with Thomas v. Oldham because Thomas involved final judgments rendered after trial, whereas this case involved the effect of an interlocutory summary judgment under section 101.106; the issue decided below was not decided in Thomas.
2. An allegation that the court of appeals erred, including an allegation involving statutory construction, does not independently confer Supreme Court jurisdiction in the context of an interlocutory appeal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Supreme Court of Texas had jurisdiction over the interlocutory appeal based on an alleged conflict between the court of appeals' decision and prior precedent.
2. Whether the alleged legal error or statutory construction issue supplied a basis for Supreme Court jurisdiction over the interlocutory appeal.

Disposition

dismissed