In re Cnty. of Hidalgo
| Decision Date | 26 October 2022 |
| Docket Number | NUMBER 13-22-00510-CV |
| Citation | 655 S.W.3d 44 |
| Parties | IN RE COUNTY OF HIDALGO, Hidalgo County Elections Department, Hilda A. Salinas, Interim Elections Administrator and Everardo Villarreal, in Both His Official Capacity as Hidalgo County Precinct 3 County Commissioner and Individual Capacity |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Carlos Escobar, Escobar Law Firm, PLLC, McAllen, for Relators.
Francisco J. Garza, Attorney at Law, McAllen, Monica Galvan, Galvan Law Group, Edinburg, for Real Parties in Interest.
Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Tijerina
Opinion by Justice Tijerina1
On October 21, 2022, the County of Hidalgo, the Hidalgo County Elections Department, Hilda A. Salinas as the Interim Elections Administrator, and Everardo Villarreal in both his official capacity as Hidalgo County Precinct 3 Commissioner and his individual capacity (relators), filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this Court. Relators assert through multiple issues that the trial court2 abused its discretion by issuing a temporary restraining order3 requiring relators "to immediately cease and desist from proceeding with the early voting elections starting on October 24, 2022, and the November 8, 2022 general election" unless relators open the Peñitas Public Library as an additional polling location.
"The right to vote is fundamental, as it preserves all other rights." Andrade v. NAACP of Austin , 345 S.W.3d 1, 12 (Tex. 2011). We are reluctant to render a decision in this case which would prevent the citizens of Peñitas from having access to a polling place within their city limits. Nonetheless, the separation of powers doctrine and the rules of civil procedure require us to conclude that the trial court's temporary restraining order cannot stand. Accordingly, we conditionally grant the petition for writ of mandamus.4
In January 2022, relators submitted a request to use the John F. Kennedy Elementary School in Peñitas, Texas, as a polling place for the 2022 election cycle. That request was denied. On August 18, 2022, relators timely issued the Notice of General Election for voters in Hidalgo County, in accordance with the August 22, 2022 deadline to do so, which included a list of polling places for the election as required by the election code. See, e.g. , TEX. ELEC. CODE ANN. § 4.003(a) (); id. § 4.004(a)(2) (). This list did not include a polling place in Peñitas.
In the middle of the afternoon on August 22, 2022, La Joya Independent School District (La Joya ISD) submitted a request to relators that Peñitas Public Library serve as an early voting polling location. On August 25, 2022, Agua Special Utility District (Agua SUD) provided a similar request. Relators informed these parties that their requests were not timely.
On Thursday, October 20, 2022, the real parties in interest, the City of Peñitas, a home-rule municipality located in Hidalgo County, Texas, and Ramiro Loya, in his official capacity as Mayor of the City of Peñitas and in his individual capacity (collectively Peñitas), filed suit against relators seeking declaratory relief, a temporary restraining order, and temporary and permanent injunctive relief. Peñitas alleged that relators’ conduct in refusing the requests to use the Peñitas Public Library as a polling place violated the Texas Election Code, the Voting Rights Act, and the Texas and United States Constitutions. Peñitas alleged that it had been "adversely affected and harmed" by relators’ conduct, "which will disenfranchise eligible Texas citizens, specifically Peñitas vote[r]s in the upcoming election this November 8, 2022." Peñitas sought ex parte relief on the stated grounds that "[t]here is not enough time to serve notice on [relators] and to hold a hearing on this application."
On October 20, 2022, the trial court held a hearing on Peñitas's request for relief. Relators were not present. Having heard Peñitas's claims, the trial court granted ex parte relief to Peñitas in the form of a temporary restraining order. The trial court therein ordered relators: (1) "to immediately cease and desist from proceeding with the early voting elections starting on October 24, 2022, and the November 8, 2022 general election without opening the Pe[ñ]itas Public Library polling location"; (2) "to immediately post a Notice of the Election that includes a list of Election Day and [e]arly voting polling locations to the Hidalgo County Election Department's website no later than Friday, October 21, 2022[,] at 7:00 a.m. and that list of polling locations shall include the City of Peñitas Public Library polling location"; and (3) "to open the City of Pe[ñ]itas Public Library polling location for the entire early voting period and General Election day as [o]rdered by La Joya ISD and Agua SUD." The temporary restraining order provided that its terms would expire on further order of the trial court or fourteen days from the date of its entry.
On Friday, October 21, 2022, relators filed this petition for writ of mandamus. Through six issues with sub-issues, relators contend that the trial court abused its discretion by granting the temporary restraining order and that they lack an adequate remedy at law. We have reorganized and restated relators’ issues for the sake of clarity. As restated, relators assert that the trial court's temporary restraining order should be set aside because: (1) it does not comply with Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 680, 683, and 684 ; (2) it violates Rule 2.6 of the "Local Rules of Hidalgo County, Texas District Courts"; (3) it violates Texas law and bypasses election laws; (4) it violates the separation of powers doctrine; and (5) the trial court does not have subject matter jurisdiction because Peñitas lacks standing, and its claims are moot. By a sixth issue, relators further assert that they lack an adequate remedy by appeal to address these errors. Relators further filed a motion for emergency stay through which they requested that we stay the temporary restraining order at issue in this original proceeding.
By order issued on Sunday afternoon, October 23, 2022, we granted the motion for emergency stay and requested that Peñitas file a response to the petition for writ of mandamus and relators’ request for emergency relief by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, October 24, 2022. Peñitas filed two motions for extension of time to file its response, its response, and a motion for leave to late-file its response. We grant Peñitas's motions and proceed to consider the merits of this original proceeding.
Mandamus is an extraordinary and discretionary remedy. See In re Allstate Indem. Co. , 622 S.W.3d 870, 883 (Tex. 2021) (orig. proceeding) ; In re Garza , 544 S.W.3d 836, 840 (Tex. 2018) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam) ; In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. , 148 S.W.3d 124, 138 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). The relator must show that (1) the trial court abused its discretion, and (2) the relator lacks an adequate remedy on appeal. In re USAA Gen. Indem. Co. , 624 S.W.3d 782, 787 (Tex. 2021) (orig. proceeding) ; In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. , 148 S.W.3d at 135–36 ; Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 839–40 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding). "The relator bears the burden of proving these two requirements." In re H.E.B. Grocery Co. , 492 S.W.3d 300, 302 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam) ; Walker , 827 S.W.2d at 840.
Relators present two issues that generally concern the timeliness of Peñitas's claims for relief in the context of the election process. In their fourth issue, relators assert that the temporary restraining order is invalid because it violates the "separation of powers" doctrine, and in part of their fifth issue, relators assert that Peñitas's claims are moot. With regard to the separation of powers, relators contend that the temporary restraining order "effectively stops the general election" and assert that the judicial branch of state government cannot interfere with an election that is in progress. Relators further argue that Peñitas's claims are moot because absentee balloting has begun and early voting began on Monday, October 24, 2022. Relators contend that they "cannot comply with the applicable statutory and regulatory deadlines to place a polling location at [the Peñitas Public Library] because said deadlines have long since passed."
Peñitas further asserts that relators’ arguments in fact support the opposite proposition—that relators’ claims are moot, whereas Peñitas's claims are not.
The Texas Supreme Court has explained the separation of powers doctrine as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial