Legal Opinion

Hill v. Board of Trustees of the Retirement System of Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)

Decided February 28, 2001No. 03-00-00276-CVPublishedCited by 61 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KIDD, Justice.

We must determine whether Samuel Hill exhausted his administrative remedies sufficient to confer jurisdiction on the district court to consider his petition for judicial review. The Employees Retirement System of Texas (“ERS”) challenged the sufficiency of Hill’s motion for rehearing filed before the agency. Because we conclude that the specificity of a motion for rehearing is not jurisdictional, we reverse the trial court’s order of dismissal for want of jurisdiction and remand for further proceedings.

Background

As a state employee, Hill was covered by the uniform group…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Dubai Petroleum Co. v. KaziTexas Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Mingus, Receiver v. WadleyTexas Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Suburban Utility Corp. v. Public Utility CommissionTexas Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Essenburg v. Dallas CountyTexas Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Sierra Club v. Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2000

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by61 opinions

  1. BFI Waste Systems of North America, Inc. v. Martinez Environmental Group, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2002
  2. Friends of Canyon Lake, Inc. v. Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2002
  3. Strayhorn v. Lexington Insurance Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2004
  4. Helton v. Railroad Com'n of Texas, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2003
  5. Heart Hospital IV, L.P. v. King, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2003

56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API