This morning, the Third Court of Appeals affirmed a Travis County trial court decision to grant a summary judgment in favor of the Comptroller’s office in a putative class action case which alleged that the Comptroller’s failure to pay interest on property returned to Texans under the Unclaimed Property Act constituted a taking.
While the court’s analysis of the Unclaimed Property Act is perhaps not of general interest, the opinion does begin with an interesting discussion of the unusual results which Travis County’s Central Docket can inspire. In this case, the State filed a motion for summary judgment on the merits prior to the class certification hearing. Judge Keel heard the motion and denied it. Judge Triana then denied the State’s Motion for Rehearing. Judge Keel’s decision was apparently a result of the State’s having made an internal book-keeping error, which made it appear as though the State had in fact earned a great deal of interest on the unclaimed property it held on behalf of the putative class, which was not in fact eventually returned along with the property.
After the State lost its MSJ and motion for rehearing, it apparently corrected and explained the clerical error and demonstrated that no interest was in fact earned. Judge Jenkins, presiding over the class certification hearing, actually ended up granting the state’s already-denied motion for summary judgment. The Third Court of Appeals included some of Judge Jenkins’ comments from the hearing expressing concern in its opinion, and it concluded that Judge Jenkins acted perfectly appropriately, as he had the power to set aside any interlocutory orders at any time before judgment (or actually until the Court’s plenary power had expired.)
This opinion, therefore, could be quite useful for anyone practicing in Austin’s central docket who finds him or her self arguing that a trial judge can and perhaps ought to revisit an earlier decision by one of his or her colleagues
Cause No. 03-05-00212-CV, Clark, et al. v. Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts
Technorati Tags:
litigation, Third Court of Appeals, law