Texas A & M University-Kingsville v. Yarbrough

Summary

The Supreme Court of Texas held that Melody Yarbrough’s challenge to Texas A&M University-Kingsville’s grievance procedures became moot after the university granted her tenure. The Court rejected her arguments that the controversy was capable of repetition or remained live because the allegedly negative evaluation could have future consequences. The Court reversed the court of appeals and rendered judgment dismissing the case.

Holdings

1. The action became moot when TAMUK granted Yarbrough tenure because the controversy concerning the effect of the challenged evaluation on her tenure application was no longer embedded in an actual controversy concerning her particular legal rights.
2. The exception did not apply because Yarbrough failed to show either that the challenged enforcement was too short in duration to permit review or that she would reasonably be subjected to the same action again.
3. The speculative possibility that the negative evaluation might cause unspecified future employment harm did not constitute a substantial controversy of sufficient immediacy and reality to support declaratory relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Yarbrough's declaratory-judgment action challenging TAMUK's grievance procedures remained a live controversy after TAMUK granted her tenure.
2. Whether the capable-of-repetition-yet-evading-review exception to mootness applied.
3. Whether the possibility that the negative evaluation could affect future employment decisions constituted a sufficient collateral consequence to preserve a justiciable controversy.

Disposition

reversed