law-pleading-sufficiency | fair notice pleading | special exceptions | motion to dismiss | plea to the jurisdiction |
dismissal and opportunity to amend |
RECENT PLEADING SUFFICIENCY RULINGS OF THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT
Dismissal on the pleadings without opportunity to amend approved in WBA context
State of Texas and TxDoT v. Lueck, No. 06-1034 (Tex. Jun. 26, 2009)(Green)(Whistleblower Act claim
dismissed)(allegation of regulatory noncompliance insufficient, report not to appropriate law enforcement
agency, allegation of violation of the law as jurisdictional element, dismissal on the pleadings by plea to the
jurisdiction, no opportunity to amend afforded)
THE STATE OF TEXAS AND THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION v. GEORGE LUECK; from
Travis County; 3rd district (03-05-00510-CV, 212 SW3d 630, 08-16-06)
motion to dismiss denied
The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and dismisses the case for lack of jurisdiction.
Justice Green delivered the opinion of the Court. [pdf 16 pgs.]
TRIAL BY CONSENT RENDERS PLEADING DEFICIENCY IRRELEVANT
As an initial matter, we must address Deere’s contention that Ingram failed to preserve his no evidence
argument regarding the existence of a partnership. First, Deere argues Ingram failed to preserve his no
evidence argument because he did not file a verified denial in response to Deere’s claim that they were
partners, which Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 93(5) requires. It is undisputed that Ingram did not file the
requisite verified denial. However, this issue was tried by consent of the parties. When both parties present
evidence on an issue and the issue is developed during trial without objection, any defects in the pleadings are
cured at trial, and the defects are waived. Tex. R. Civ. P. 67; Sage St. Assocs. v. Northdale Constr. Co., 863 S.
W.2d 438, 445–46 (Tex. 1993).
Inram v. Deere, No. 06-0815 (Tex. Jul 3, 2009)(Wainwright)(dispute over existence of partnership under TRPA,
partnership criteria/factors, fiduciary duty) (existence of partnership not proven, take-nothing judgment
JESSE C. INGRAM, PH.D. AND BEHAVIORAL PSYCHOLOGY CLINIC, P.C. v. LOUIS DEERE, D.O. AND
HILLVALE MEDICAL GROUP ASSOCIATION D/B/A HILLVALE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION; from Dallas County; 5th
district (05-05-00063-CV, 198 SW3d 96, 04-27-06 Opinion of the Dallas court of Appeals)
The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and reinstates the trial court's judgment.
Justice Wainwright delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Jefferson, Justice Hecht, Justice
Medina, Justice Green, and Justice Willett joined, in which Justice O'Neill and Justice Brister joined except as to
part II.D.5.a, and in which Justice Johnson joined except as to part II.D.2. [pdf]
Justice Johnson delivered a concurring opinion. [pdf]
Low v. Henry, 221 S.W.3d 609, 612 (Tex. 2007) (“Texas follows a ‘fair notice’ standard for pleading, in
which courts assess the sufficiency of pleadings by determining whether an opposing party can ascertain from
the pleading the nature, basic issues, and the type of evidence that might be relevant to the controversy.”).