Richards v. Mena
| Decision Date | 30 October 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. D-1549,D-1549 |
| Citation | 820 S.W.2d 371 |
| Parties | Ann RICHARDS, Governor of Texas, et al., Appellants, v. Guadalupe MENA, et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
This action was filed on February 7, 1991, challenging the use of unadjusted 1990 United States Census data for redetermining the districts of members of the United States Congress from Texas, the Texas Senate, the Texas House of Representatives, and the Texas State Board of Education. Following an evidentiary hearing, the district court issued an order dated August 22, 1991, holding that the redistricting plans adopted by the Legislature for the State Senate and House of Representatives, and existing plans for the Congressional and State Board of Education districts, violated various provisions of the Texas Constitution. Based upon this holding, the district court enjoined the use of such plans. Defendants appealed directly to this Court, thereby suspending enforcement of the district court's injunction. TEX.CIV.PRAC. & REM.CODE § 6.001; Ammex Warehouse Co. v. Archer, 381 S.W.2d 478, 481-82 (Tex.1964). No party has complained of this suspension of the district court's order.
The district court set the trial of this case for October 1, 1991, to expedite a final determination. On September 23, 1991, appellants moved this Court to stay proceedings in the district court so that the parties could focus their efforts on the presentation of the issues in this appeal. The Court granted appellants' motion the next day, because the circumstances at that time appeared to warrant the relief. Cf. Coalition of Cities for Affordable Utility Rates v. Third Court of Appeals, 787 S.W.2d 946, 947 (Tex.1990). On October 9, 1991, we noted probable jurisdiction, TEX. CONST. art. V, § 3-b; TEX.GOV'T CODE § 22.001(c); TEX.R.APP.P. 140; granted the parties' requests to expedite consideration; established a briefing schedule; and set the case for oral submission on October 29, 1991.
At oral submission the parties advised the Court that the posture of the litigation has changed since the district court issued its order in that only the redistricting of the Texas House of Representatives remains in dispute between appellants and appellees, and that there are fact issues which must be resolved before all issues can finally be adjudicated. Intervenors in the district court have raised additional issues. A majority of the Court now concludes that its order staying proceedings in the district court should be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Terrazas v. Ramirez, D-1817
......C-454-91-F, styled Mena v. Richards, and the other dated October 7, 1991, in Cause No. C-4395-91-F, styled Quiroz v. ......
-
Perry v. Del Rio, 01-0988.
...law if the trial judge has granted or denied injunctive relief on constitutional grounds regarding that action. See, e.g., Richards v. Mena, 820 S.W.2d 371 (Tex. 1991); Upham v. White, 639 S.W.2d 301 (Tex.1982); Smith v. Craddick, 471 S.W.2d 375 (Tex.1971). But because the Legislature did n......
-
Perry v Del Rio, 010988
...law if the trial judge has granted or denied injunctive relief on constitutional grounds regarding that action. See, e.g., Richards v. Mena, 820 S.W.2d 371 (Tex. 1991); Upham v. White, 639 S.W.2d 301 (Tex. 1982); Smith v. Craddick, 471 S.W.2d 375 (Tex. 1971). But because the Legislature did......
-
Vineyard v. Irvin
...holding with regard to the State's exemption from supersedeas bond requirements under the present section 6.001 exemption. Richards v. Mena, 820 S.W.2d 371 (Tex.1991). We perceive no substantive difference in the wording of TEX.PROB.CODE ANN. § 29 that would suggest it should be construed a......