Opinion
No. 05-17-00281-CV
06-05-2018
KOJO NKANSAH, Appellant v. TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION AND CITY OF DALLAS, Appellees
On Appeal from the 95th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-16-03168
ORDER
Before the Court is appellees' joint motion for rehearing to modify or correct the judgment. Appellees request that the Court reconsider that provision of the judgment that orders that appellant, Kojo Nkansah, recover his costs of this appeal from appellees.
The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provides that a court of appeals' judgment should award costs to the prevailing party. TEX. R. APP. P. 43.4. Appellees were the prevailing parties in this case. Normally, we would order that the prevailing parties would recover their costs of appeal from appellant, but the Texas Labor Code provides that an individual claiming unemployment benefits may not be charged a fee by the commission or a court. TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 207.007(a) (West 2015). Therefore, we could not order that the City and the Commission recover their costs of appeal from Nkansah. The statute does not state who pays the costs—just that they cannot be recovered from the individual claiming unemployment benefits.
Sister courts interpreting this statute have determined that a trial court erred in assessing costs against an individual claiming unemployment benefits, and have reversed and rendered judgment assessing the costs of trial and appeal against the Texas Workforce Commission. See Rodriguez v. Texas Workforce Commission, 986 S.W.2d 781, 785 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1999, pet. denied); see also Texas Employment Commission v. Tates, 769 S.W.2d 290, 293 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1989, no writ) (interpreting Article 5221b-13(b), which is the predecessor statute to section 207.007). In this case, we followed our sister courts in assessing the costs of appeal against the Texas Workforce Commission and The City of Dallas.
Upon consideration of appellees' argument that there is no requirement under statute or rule that requires Nkansah's costs to be taxed to the City or the Commission, and without express direction to do otherwise by the Texas Supreme Court, we GRANT appellees' Motion to modify the judgment. An Amended Judgment is entered in accordance with this Order, deleting the provision that orders the assessment of costs against the City and the Commission.
/s/ JASON BOATRIGHT
JUSTICE