Source: http://www.houston-opinions.com/files/14thCoA-2010-Harris-County-Flood-Control-District-v-Great-American-Ins-Co-by-Hedges-governmental-immunity-ILA.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 12:31:28+00:00

Document:
court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Dissenting Opinion by Justice Mirabal in Harris County Flood Control Dist. v. Great American Ins. Co.
affirm in part, and remand.
appellee had the right to complete the project in conformity with the terms and conditions of the original contract.
purchase order for the project and designated appellee as the completing contractor for the project.
denied appellant’s Plea to the Jurisdiction, this accelerated interlocutory appeal followed.
first issue addresses appellee’s quantum meruit cause of action, the second, appellee’s attorney’s fees claim.
arguing that the Texas legislature has not waived appellant’s immunity from suit.
Mexia, 197 S.W.3d 325, 332 (Tex. 2006). Immunity from suit bars suit against the entity altogether. Id.
Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 311.034 (Vernon 2005)).
A plea to the jurisdiction based on government immunity challenges the trial court’s subject matter jurisdiction.
question of law. Id. Therefore, we review a challenge to the trial court’s subject matter jurisdiction de novo. Id.
pleadings and evidence relevant to the jurisdictional inquiry. Tex. Dep’t of Parks & Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.
3d 217, 226 (Tex. 2004).
Local Government Code waived appellant’s immunity from suit on its quantum meruit cause of action.
Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, rule 53.7(f) motion granted) (citing City of Houston v. Swinerton Builders, Inc., 233 S.
of the Texas Government Code (“Prompt Pay Act”). We address each statute in turn.
the Legislature added section 271.153(a)(3) to the Local Government Code and repealed section 271.159.
transportation code providing for resolution of a ‘claim arising under a contract.’” McMahon Contracting, 277 S.
provide a clear and unambiguous waiver of appellant’s immunity from suit for appellee’s attorney’s fee claim.
We sustain appellant’s second issue.
action. We remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Seymore and Senior Justice Mirabal.(Mirabal, J.
support of this argument: Speer v. Stover, 685 S.W.2d 22, 23 (Tex. 1985) and City of Cleburne v. Trussell, 10 S.
that we have jurisdiction to hear this appeal.
adjudicating a claim for breach of the contract, subject to the terms and conditions of this subchapter.
Tex. Loc. Gov’t Code Ann. § 271.152 (Vernon 2005).
Tex. Loc. Gov’t Code Ann. § 271.153(a)(3) (Vernon Supp. 2009).
adjudication to recover its reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees by specific reference to this section.
Tex. Loc. Gov’t Code Ann. § 271.159 (Vernon 2005 ).
 Senior Justice Margaret Garner Mirabal sitting by assignment.

References: v. 
 § 311
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 271
 § 271
 § 271