Opinion ID: 2419959
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: THE MAJORITY OPINION IS UNRELATED TO WESTHEIMER I.S.D.'s POINTS OF ERROR

Text: The majority has reversed the court of civil appeals on grounds which were not asserted by any party in written briefs or urged by any party during oral argument. Westheimer I.S.D. is the party objecting to the reformation of the injunction which allows future judicial appeal of the order creating the School District. In its points of error concerning the reformation of the injunction, Westheimer I.S.D. alleges several theories of error; i. e., estoppel by judgment, res judicata, collateral attack, statute of limitations, and compulsory counterclaim. However, at no point has Westheimer I.S.D. urged this court to rule the delay to appeal unreasonable as a matter of law, nor does Westheimer I.S.D. cite any of the authorities relied upon by the majority in so ruling. The majority, therefore, in straining to reach the result herein obtained has gone beyond the points of error urged by Westheimer I.S.D. and indeed beyond the scope of any contention made by Westheimer I.S.D. in its briefs or otherwise. The majority maintains that its decision is based upon Westheimer I.S.D.'s unbriefed argument that there should be an end to litigation and upon the strong public policy favoring an end to litigation. Each of these theories is meritorious when utilized in a cause of action which properly develops the issues and facts to support the application of such principles. Unfortunately, this court does not have before it such development of the instant case. Public interest and public policy are not static and readily definable, but are, as a rule, relative to the issues and interest developed in a controversy. The parties herein have not been afforded an opportunity to plead or prove the harm caused by the delay in appealing, nor has there been any proof that public interest demands that this delay be held unreasonable. On the contrary, when extensive evidence was presented to the federal district court there appeared to be adequate evidence that the public interest demanded that the formation of Westheimer I.S.D. be reviewed as it constituted a serious socio-economic threat. Accordingly, this writer would affirm the judgment of the court of civil appeals which permits a possible future challenge to the validity of the creation of Westheimer I.S.D. in an appropriate state district court.