### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03-0 8 -00 423 -CV

Ci tyof A ust in, App e lla nt

v. Cl ift on A le xa nde r , R ob A c ke r , J oe Aug e r i, J am e s Ba ke r , D ougBoe s, Br ad Ba lla r d, J ohn Bann ing , Sc ot t B ar te ll, Edwar d Bax te r , D an Be ar d, D av id Be ar de n, D av id Be lkna p, M ike Be wle y, M ike l Bo r g, Da vid Br ie tz ke , D r e w Bri tc he r , Be c ky Br oo ks, K e vin Br oo ks, M alv in Brown , P alm er Buck, Richard Bun te, Je rem y Burke, Richard Cand elario, Alfred Cer vera, Bret C arr, M ichael Chapp ell, Duncan Charlton, An drew Chelf , John Ch erry, Ed Cisl er, Lar r y C lowr y, Je r r y C ohe n, R obbi e Co lt , M at t C ox , W ade Cr ain , G r e g C r owle y, P r e st in Curtis, Mar shall Dandridge, Richard Davis, S cottDec uir, Doug Dedear, David Dixon, Tom Dodds, An thony Dw yer, Lynn Eichl er, D onald Eickh off , Dan Ell iott, Trac y Evans, Jorge F elix, Stuart F inn essey, Cr ocket F oster , Lion el F oster , Doug F owl er, F aron F owl er, Ken F owl er, M ike F rick, Daniel Galvan, Hom ero Bar cia, David Gar za, Mike G eraty, Law rence Ge ss, John Gr een, G uy Groom er, R andy Gunn , Lui s Gutier rez , Bob H am ilton, Rob Hay de n, D ani e l He r m an, G r e go r io H e r nande z , D av id Hi e be r t, P at r ic k Ho lm an, M ar y A nn Hub bard, Phil Jack, Scott Janec ek, Randy Jon es, Andre Jor dan, T ravis Jordan, Janet K all us, Cl iffor d K e ale y, Ro d K e lle y, Br ya n K e nt , Edg arK ne uppe r , K e llyK nobl oc h, C hr is Laf ferre , Brad Lan di, Joh n Lenz, Raym ond L escbher, M ike Littrell, K en Lones, Joe Loug hr an, Jo hn Lo wer y, Da vid Lunds te dt , Er ic Lupt on, M ar k M adi so n, Th om as M adi so n, Carm en Maguire, Danny Marquis, Juan J. Mart inez, SteveMart inez, Mat t Mc Brayer , Do nal d M c Cul lou gh, M at t M c Ele r ne y, Le s M c kay , M ar ion M c Kibbin , W ill iamM c Lai n, Ric ha r d M e nd e z , Br e ntM e is e nh e im e r , C ha d M e s s e r s m it h, La r r yM il le r , W il l M o nc r ie f, Ricky Moore , P hil Mueller, Mike Nascim beni, Rand ell Nations, Brian Nolan , Michael No r r is, G le n O’ De ll, Te r r e nc e Oe r tl i, J oe Ola gue , Lo nnie Owe n, R obe r t A . P ar ke r , W ay ne P arrish, G reg P aschall, Gary P askos, Mike Pe arson, Angel P ere z, P aul Phillip s, Mark P igg, Hun terP om roy, Todd Pom roy, Mic hael P ooler, G reg P owers, Tye P range, G ary P riest, Carie P ritc hard, And y Rear don, Greg R eddish , Tom Reiner, Scot t Re ynold s, Roy Ri c har dso n, J oe Ri dge way, Al e x R odr igu e z , Edwa r d Ro e l, D e an R um e l, C hr is Sa ndm an, Marc ello Saenz, Nicholas Schap pe, KimSchm idt, And rew Schul tz, M ark Schul tz, Barbara Sc ot ti , V inc e nt e Se r r ano , D av id Sm it h, M ike St e phe nso n, Tr ac e y Sui r e , R e gg ie Tai t, Jus ti n Taltentino, Roger Tanner, Evere tt Thom as, Kat hy Tou ret ellotte , Tim Tr eckm an, Steph en Truesdell, Rene Vallejo, Stan Van Hoose, Jose Vaquez, M iguel Vasqu ez, R obert V ickery, Ar t V ie r ia, M ike Vi lla r r e al, K e llyWa c ke r , Br ando n Wa de , Brya n Wa ge r s, Jo n Wa ke fie ld, Sc ot t W alt e r s, Chr is W at so n, C har le s W e ise , J ohn W e lle r , La wre nc e We sle y, Ja n We sso n, Carlton Whitehurst, Tom m y Wilki ns, Michael Willi am s, Lance Williamson, Charles Wolf e, Hugh Wood ard, Aaron Woolvert on, Ger ald Worry, and S cottWorth , AppelleesTh e name s o f the pa rt ie s in c a us e numbe r 0 3- 08 -0 04 23 -C V h ave be e n ta ke n f ro m th e City 1 of Austin’s notice of

appea l, while the names of the par ties in cause number 03-08- 00594-CV have been taken from the Fire Fighters’ notice of a ppeal. To the extent there ar e diffe renc es in the name s of ind ivi du a l pl a int if

fs , th e se dif

fe re nc e s a re a lso re fl e c te d in

the pa rt ie s’ no tic e s o f a

pp e a l. The pa rties’ motions for leave to file supplementa l post-submiss ion briefs a re he reby 2 g rante d. 2 F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 345TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1- GN-07- 0024 23 , HO NORAB LE ORLI NDA NARAN JO , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E MO R

A N D UM O P I N I O N

A number of

curr ent and former Austin f ire fig hters (collec tively , “the Fire Fighters”) filed suit ag ainst the City

of Austin (“the City ”), claiming violations of the F ire F ighte r and Police Offic er Civil Service A ct, see Te x. L oc . G ov ’t Cod e An n. §§ 14 3. 00 1- .3 63 (We st 20 08 ) ( “ the Civ il Service Act”) . Specifica lly , the Fir e F ighte rs alleg e that City of Aus t i n Or d i n ance 020926-13 violates sections 143.041 and 143.044 of the Civil S erv i ce Act by preve nting them f

rom simult aneously

rec eivingboth cer

tification pay

and educ ational incentive pa y . See id. §§ 143.041, .044. The F ire F ighte rs see k decla ratory , injunctive, and mandamus relief, a s well as an a war d of back pa y . The Ci ty filed a partial plea to the j urisdiction in connection with the bac k pay claims of

a cer tain portion of the Fire Fighters. The trial court de nied the plea , and the City filed the pre sent interlocutory

appea l. Meanwh i l e, the par ties filed cr oss-motions for summary judgme nt, and the tr ia l c ourt iss ue d a fi na l or de r gra

nti ngsumma

ry jud g me nt i n f

avo r o f t he City . T he F ir e F ighte rs ’ appea l from the summary

judgme nt is cause number 03-08-00594- CV. O n

th e par ties’ joint moti on, 1

we c onsolidated the two appe als for the limit ed purpose of consider ation. 2Th e City a lso argue s, in t he a lte rn ativ e , th at se c tio n 1 80 .0 06 c ann ot b e a pp lie d r e tr oa c tiv e ly 3 to c la ims that accrue d

befo re J u n e 15, 2007. At a minimum, however , the City conce des that g overnme ntal immunit y does not ba r the back pay claims of nine of the individual plaintiffs to the extent thos e cla ims accr

ued af ter June 15, 2007. 3 B e c a us e we are c omp e lle d to re a c h the me ri ts o f t he summa

ry jud g me nt r e g ard le ss of our de termin at i o n of the jurisdictional issue, and be cause we a ffirm the tria l court’s grant of summary judgme nt dismi ssing a ll of the Fire Fighters’ c laims in cause number 03-08-00594- CV, we dismiss as moot the Cit y ’s i nterlocutory appea l of t he denial of its partial plea to the jurisdiction.

DI SCU SSIO N The City conce des that the trial court had subj ect- matter jurisdi ction over all of the Fire Fighters’ c laims other than their c laims for bac k pay . The Ci t y fu rt h er concedes that g overnme ntal immunit y has been waived with r eg ard to the ba ck pay claims of at lea st nine of the individual plaintiffs beca

use they first asser ted their c laims by filing this s uit after the J une 15, 2007

e f f e c ti v e d ate o f th e immu

n it y w a iv e r f

o un d in lo c a l g o v e r

nme n t c o d e s e c ti o n180.006. S ee T e x. L oc. Gov’ t Code Ann. § 180.006 (West 2008) (wa iving immunit y for ba ck pay claims by fire f ighte rs

or po lic e of

fi c e rs a g a ins t e mpl oyingmun ic ipa lity ); see also id. historical note [Act of J une 15, 2007, 80 th L e g ., R.S. , c h. 12 00 , § 3, 20 07 Te x. Ge n. L aws 40 71 , 40 72 ] ( wa ive r of immun ity “ a pp lie s o nly to a c la im .

. . ini tia lly a sse rt e d on or af te r t he e ff e c tiv e date [June 15 , 2 00 7] of thi s A c t.” ). Th e City

argue s, ho we ve r, that be c a us e the re ma ind e r o f the pla int if fs fi le d a pr e vio us laws uit un de r the same the or y of re c ov e ry in 200 6, the y “ ini tia lly a sse rt e d” the ir ba c k pay c la ims pr ior to the e ff e c tiv e date of sec tion 180.006 and there fore cannot take advanta g e of the immunit y waiver

. 34 In supplemental briefing to this Court, the City states that its “partial jurisdictional challeng e implicates only Plaintiffs’ claims for retrospec tive money damag es—not subject matter jurisdiction to hear the Plaintiffs’ c laims. There fore , if thi s C o u rt upholds the trial court de cision [gra nting summary

judgme nt] in Appeal No. 03- 08-00594, there is no need to re ach the City ’s jurisdictional arguments.” We agree . Given that the jurisdictional cha lleng e implicates only the back pay claims raised by some of t he Fire Fig hters and does not aff ect the Fire Fighters’ c laims for pr os pe c tiv e re lie f o r t

he tr ia l cour t’ s juri sd ic tio n to de te rm ine wh e the r t he City vio late d th e Civ il Service Act, we must review the me rits of the summary judgme nt r eg ardle ss of our holdingon the jurisdictional question.

Whil e an a

ppellate c ourt ty

pically must e x amine questions of jurisdiction, even whe n not raised by

the par ties, in order “to ensure that its de cision on the merits is not merely advisory ,” W aco Inde p. Sch. Dist. v. Gibson , 22 S.W .3d 849, 853-54 (Tex. 2000) (He cht, J ., dissenting) , there is no potential for a n ad v i s ory opinion in thi s case , as the City conce des that the trial c ourt had jurisdiction over the F ire F ighte rs’ c laims that the City violated the Civil S ervic e Ac t. Fur thermore , in light of our opinion issued today in cause number 03-08- 00594-CV, in which we he ld that the trial court’ s order g rantingsummary

judgme nt and dismissi ngall of the F ir e F ighte rs ’ c la ims wa s pro pe r, any de te rm inatio n re g ard ing jurisd ic tio n as to the ba c k p ay c la ims of ce rtain F ire F ighte rs would have no eff ect on the rights of the p ar ties. Se eVE Cor p. v . E rn st &Y oung , 860 S.W .2d 83, 84 (Tex. 1993) (per curiam) (“[A]n appeal is moot when the c ourt’s ac tion

on the me ri ts c ann ot a ff

e c t th e ri g hts of

the pa rt ie s. ” ); cf. Dardas v. Fle ming, Hove nkamp &Gray so n, P. C. , 194 S.W .3d 603, 621 n.7 (Tex. App.—Houston [14t h Di s t.] 2006, pet. denied)5

(dec lining to re solve jurisdictional question that “ would not a ffe ct our judgme nt in this case” ). On that basis, we dismiss the City ’s ap p eal from the trial cour t’s denial of its par

tial plea to the jurisdiction.

CO NC LU SION

We dis mis s a s moo t the City ’s int e rl oc uto ry a pp e a l fr om t

he tr ia l c ourt ’s de nia l of

its partial plea

to the jurisdiction.

__________________________________________ Diane M. H enson, Jus tice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Waldrop and He nson Dismissed as Moot Filed: Nove mber 20, 2009