descrybe logo
You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Texas Association of Business National Federation of Independent Business, American Staffing Association LeadingEdge Personnel, Ltd. Staff Force, Inc. HT Staffing Ltd. D/B/A the HT Group The Burnett Companies Consolidated, Inc., D/B/A Burnett Specialists Society for Human Resource Management Texas State Council of the Society for Human Resource Management Austin Human Resource Management Association Strickland School, LLC And the State of Texas v. City of Austin, Texas, and Spencer Cronk, City Manager of the City of Austin

Citation: Not availableDocket: 03-18-00445-CV

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; August 17, 2018; Texas; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves appellants, including various business associations and the State of Texas, seeking to enjoin the implementation of the City of Austin's paid-sick-leave ordinance, which was scheduled to take effect on October 1, 2018. The appellants filed a motion for temporary relief under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 29.3, along with a request for an expedited appellate schedule due to the ordinance's impending enforcement. The Court granted the motion to enjoin the ordinance, finding it necessary to preserve the rights of the parties during the pendency of their interlocutory appeal. The Court emphasized that this decision did not address the merits of the case, which originated from an order denying a temporary injunction, and acknowledged the distinct standards for temporary injunctions and Rule 29.3 relief. Furthermore, the Court extended the deadline for the City to submit its appellees’ brief to September 6, 2018, to facilitate a swift resolution of the case, as underscored by Chief Justice Rose and Justices Pemberton and Field in their order issued on August 17, 2018.

Legal Issues Addressed

Distinction Between Temporary Injunction and Rule 29.3 Relief

Application: The Court highlighted the different standards for granting a temporary injunction compared to temporary relief under Rule 29.3.

Reasoning: The Court noted that the appeal stemmed from an order denying a temporary injunction, clarifying that its decision on temporary relief did not reflect on the merits of the underlying case.

Expedited Appellate Schedule

Application: The Court granted the request for an expedited appellate schedule due to the ordinance's imminent implementation.

Reasoning: They also requested an expedited appellate schedule due to the ordinance's imminent implementation.

Filing Deadline for Appellees' Brief

Application: The Court extended the deadline for the City to file its appellees’ brief to ensure a prompt resolution of the case.

Reasoning: Additionally, the Court extended the deadline for the City to file its appellees’ brief to September 6, 2018, and emphasized the importance of promptly resolving the case.

Temporary Relief under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 29.3

Application: The Court granted the motion to enjoin the ordinance to preserve the parties' rights pending the interlocutory appeal.

Reasoning: The Court found that enjoining the ordinance was necessary to preserve the parties' rights and granted the motion for temporary relief under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 29.3.