Originally published by David Coale.
A case about state education policy became moot after the plaintiff nonsuited (after a favorable court of appeals opinion, and during the course of merits briefing before the supreme court). The Court dismissed the appeal and vacated the court of appeals opinon, nothing the general Texas rules on the subject and observing:
“Vacatur removes the opinion’s binding precedential nature but does not strike it from case reporters or foreclose litigants and courts in future cases from relying on it as persuasive authority. Thus, while we use the term ‘vacated’ to describe the court of appeals’ opinion in this case, the practical effect of today’s action is to remove from the opinion any formal precedential effect. Again, we previously compared the precedential status of a court of appeals opinion after the judgment has been vacated to a case bearing the notation ‘writ dismissed.’ Whatever the precise import of that notation, ‘vacating’ such an opinion simply eliminates any binding precedential effect it may have. This ensures the path is truly clear for relitigation by indicating to lower courts and future panels of the court of appeals that they are under no obligation to follow the opinion in future cases. It does not, however, eliminate altogether ‘the public nature of the court of appeals opinion.’”
Morath v. Lewis, No. 18-0555 (April 17, 2020) (per curiam).
The post Vacation appeared first on 600 Hemphill.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/2ysQpwB
via Abogado Aly Website
No comments:
Post a Comment