TexasCHLforum.com

The Supreme Court of Texas denied review of Attorney General petition on 11 March 2022. Justice Devine dissented.

https://search.txcourts.gov/SearchMedia ... 0dfa55059f

Without rereading my own posts above, as I recall the Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s decision, so this means the trial court’s rulings stand. Austin gets fined about $6K if I remember correctly. Maybe interest also.

Also if I recall correctly, this means you can carry on authority of your LTCH In the Austin City Hall building other than the actual court room and court offices, unless court is in session, in which case you may not carrying any part of the building. I don’t remember if open curry was legal when this case started, so I don’t know how that is affected, and I’m pretty sure constitutional carry did not come around until after this case started, so ditto.

On to the Texas Supreme Court.

Sigh.

The Case Detail shows "submitted" for the date 6/1/21, but doesn't say who submitted what. Presumably it's one or more written briefs for the panel to consider. I'm guessing it's from the AG's office, since the AG is the one that appealed the trial court decisions and also wanted oral arguments (which was denied).

Justice Chari Kelly is a Democrat

Justice Melissa Goodwin is a Republican

Justice Edward Smith is a Democrat

Official bios can be found here: https://www.txcourts.gov/3rdcoa/about-the-court.aspx

WHOA! MOVEMENT!

And I missed it last week.

The AG had asked the appellate court for oral argument back in December 2019. The City of Austin did not request oral argument. The court finally ruled on this, denying oral argument on 10 May 21. Instead they set a deadline of Tuesday 01 Jun 21 for submission of briefs. The appeal will be reviewed by Justices Melissa Goodwin, Chari Kelly, and Edward Smith. I know nothing of them, and I don't know how fast they will actually take up the submissions and act on them.

In lesser news, the City of Austin switched out their lead attorney on the case because the previous one is no longer employed by the city. The new lead attorney for Austin is Hannah Vahl. The lead attorney for the State is Judd Stone.

I had been wondering if the appeals court was letting this case lay in limbo until they could see if the Legislature was going to do anything about it. Since it appears the Leg will not, I guess the court will now take up the matter.

Annnnnnddd...still nothing. The last brief was filed in this case one year ago. Since then the only changes have been motions to swap out attorneys as those originally assigned to the case go elsewhere.

AFAIK the scheduling of this case is entirely up to the appellate court. I'm sure it is not among the most momentous cases facing the appeals level, but yumpin yiminy. The Legislature of course has a chance to fix the basic problem, and I think in one of Springer's bills he he proposes forbidding any government entity from banning licensed carry at all. I would hate to see City of Austin dodge their. $1.5M or greater (by now) fine just because of mootness.

LDP wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 4:54 pm Again, my personal opinion is that someone dropped the ball and failed to perform his duty as AG.
The rulings need to be made and heard, justice needs to be served and the guilty (New California in the heart of our great state) need to be let go and not punished because the tax payers will pay the multi-million fees for the whim of our liberal leaders who know they are above the law.

Ugh, Paxton needs to wake up and not be such a sissy that he is. He needs to do the job we pay him to do. Our state suffers from his laziness.

Exactly, specifically, what should he have done differently in this case?

Sigh. The wife of the new lead attorney for the OAG is also expecting, and he just requested the court not schedule any hearings for November or December. I reckon that means October is right out as well. So no appeal decision in 2020.

The lead (I think) attorney for City of Austin submitted a letter to the court requesting that no trial be held in late May, June, or July because his wife was due to have a baby and he would be on leave. Although the letter is dated 22 May it wasn't up on the website in early June (last time I looked at it), so I guess it takes awhile for things to be posted.

The OAG submitted a motion on 22 June requesting permission to replace their lead attorney, since he was leaving the employ of the OAG on 2 July. The new guy is Assistant Attorney General Jason R. Lafond, who I believe has been involved in the case previously.

No trial date or other action has been posted.

http://search.txcourts.gov/Case.aspx?cn ... &coa=coa03

And it languishes still...

And....

Still no movement. The AG's office asked to have a hearing with oral arguments set before 01 July because the AG's lead lawyer will depart the AG's office for other employment on that date. I would assume the Appeals Court sets its schedule well in advance, so since it is already 10 Jun I don't see this happening prior to 01 July.

C-dub wrote: ↑Fri Apr 17, 2020 1:27 pm

ELB wrote: ↑Wed Mar 18, 2020 2:37 pm Ah, here we go:

Whelp, this COVID 19 business is not going to make Paxton v. City of Austin courthouse sign litigation get resolved any faster...

Won't that only increase their fine when the City of Austin loses?

Not according to the trial court judge and the City of Austin. That's one of the key issues of the appeal.

But in the civilized world, yes.

As of 23 March the case is "ready to be set" which I assume means everything is in place for the Court of Appeals to set a hearing date -- if they choose to hear it at all -- but no indication of when that might be.

http://search.txcourts.gov/Case.aspx?cn ... &coa=coa03

Ah, here we go:

Whelp, this COVID 19 business is not going to make Paxton v. City of Austin courthouse sign litigation get resolved any faster...