Court Opinion

ID: 9668020
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 02:00:29.955216+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:42.437515
License: Public Domain

RICHARD H. EDELMAN, Justice,
dissenting.
As explained in Barlow, appellate courts clearly had jurisdiction over license suspension appeals until 1985. See Texas Dep’t of Public Safety v. Barlow, 992 S.W.2d 732, 738-39 (Tex.App.—Waco 1999, pet. filed). Barlow states that this jurisdiction was then lost when the Legislature “significantly rewrote” and “substantively amended” the former article 2249 by reco-difying it as section 51.012 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code. See id. at 739, 740. However, the session law in which section 51.012 was enacted describes itself as a “nonsubstantive revision” and further describes the State’s overall codification effort of which it was a part as a revision of “statute law without substantive change.” See Act of May 17, 1985, 69 th Leg., R.S., ch. 959, § 1, 1985 Tex. Gen. Laws 3242, 3244. I would therefore hold that the jurisdiction over license suspension appeals which existed until 1985 was not then lost because, despite the change in wording, section 51.012 was not intended as a substantive change to the former article 2249.