Free Speech, Due Process and Trial by Jury
Jennifer Harris’ attorney, Brian Sanford of Sanford Firm, told The Lawbook he plans to appeal the ruling either by seeking rehearing en banc at the Fifth Circuit or by petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case. Harris was awarded $366 million, including $365 in punitive damages, by a jury that rejected her claim of racial discrimination but did find that Harris’ firing was retaliatory.
During oral arguments Wednesday, Justices questioned lawyers about the after-the-fact reviews for determining whether police officers act in good faith in rapidly evolving situations and when government immunity ought to apply.
The main issue in the case involves whether the state proved scienter — that Dr. Richard Malouf knew he was in violation of the law when he filed forms for reimbursement 1,842 times representing he had performed certain services that were actually performed by trainees at his All Smiles Dental Clinic — which is required for the judgment to stand. After Texas was granted the early win by Travis County District Judge Catherine Mauzy, Malouf appealed and a three-justice panel affirmed the holding in October 2022. He took his fight to the Texas Supreme Court in January 2023, and in November the court agreed to hear the case.
Each term, watchers of the Texas Supreme Court are likely to see the court grant review in a handful of cases interpreting oil and gas leases, or cases requiring them to delineate what constitutes a medical malpractice claim. But this term, the court has taken an interest in something slightly different: three cases involving police crashes and the immunity that typically shields officers from related litigation.
Six Texas Supreme Court justices peppered three lawyers with about two-dozen questions during an hour of oral argument Tuesday morning in an effort to determine whether the state’s Public Utility Commission was within its power to manually set electric rates at $9,000 per megawatt-hour during the four days of Winter Storm Uri in 2021 or if a massive, multibillion-dollar repricing needs to take place.
“The question before this court is a narrow, legal one: Does the plain text of PURA authorize the PUC to order ERCOT to restore competitive scarcity pricing signals to the electricity market and ensure the reliability of the electric grid?” Macey Reasoner Stokes, an appellate partner at Baker Botts in Houston who represents Calpine and Talen Energy, told the state’s highest court. “We submit the answer is a resounding yes.” Lawyers for Luminant disagreed. The Texas Lawbook has the details.
After Texas Disposal System successfully persuaded the Travis Appraisal Review Board to lower the valuation of its landfill by more than 80 percent, the Travis Central Appraisal District sought a district court’s review. TDS successfully argued that the trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction over the appraisal district’s claim that the property was below market value because it had brought only an unequal-appraisal protest. SCOTX will review a court of appeals decision to allow the appraisal district to proceed with its case. Business taxpayers are weighing in as the dispute presents major questions for the handling of appraisal protests.
More than a dozen of the largest electric power companies operating in Texas will face off with their state regulator Tuesday at the Texas Supreme Court. At stake are billions of dollars paid and received under emergency circumstances during Winter Storm Uri three years ago. The energy companies, led by Dallas-based Luminant and Houston-headquartered Pattern Energy, claim that the Texas Public Utility Commission illegally and unnecessarily increased the rates to buy and sell electricity for the four days that unprecedented cold temperatures and freezing rain engulfed the state in February 2021 — rate increases that caused some companies to lose billions of dollars while providing other energy companies billions of dollars in sudden profits.
Judge Patrick E. Higginbotham authored the panel opinion and a concurrence, saying the court was bound to follow its own precedent in this case while also calling on the Fifth Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court to “revisit the doctrine” that is “deployed daily across this country” in police shooting cases. The case involves the shooting death of Ashtian Barnes, who was stopped for having outstanding toll violations — a non-arrestable offense — and was killed by Officer Roberto Felix Jr. when he attempted to drive away.
© Copyright 2025 The Texas Lawbook
The content on this website is protected under federal Copyright laws. Any use without the consent of The Texas Lawbook is prohibited.