Opinion
NO. 14-17-00152-CV
05-02-2017
THIEN AN VO, Appellant v. HARRIS COUNTY, LINEBARGER, HARRIS COUNTY TOLL ROAD AUTHORITY, Appellees
On Appeal from County Civil Court at Law No. 3 Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1085934
ORDER
The underlying case concerns unpaid tolls for appellant's use of the Harris County Toll Roads. Appellee Harris County Toll Road Authority issued an administrative order directing appellant to pay the unpaid tolls and associated fees, charges, fines, and costs. Appellant appealed that order to the county court at law. The county court at law signed a final summary judgment affirming the administrative order on January 30, 2017. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal from that judgment. The notice of appeal stated that the "appeal is being taken to the Harris County District Court in Houston, Texas, pursuant to Article 5, Section 8 of Texas Constitution, and Texas Government Code, title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter 24, Section 24.024." The county clerk assigned the appeal to this court.
Appellant has now filed a motion asking that this court "transfer this case, its subject matter, and all of the county court records and reporter's record to district court for lack of current jurisdiction."
If appealed, a final judgment from a county court at law is appealed to the court of appeals. See Tex. Const. art. 5, § 6; Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.230(a) (West 2004 & Supp. 2016). Appellant has cited no authority suggesting the district court has appellate jurisdiction to review the January 30, 2017 judgment of the county court at law.
Based on the clerk's record, it appears appellant's defense in the trial court included assertions about the propriety of a 2004 order from the Harris County Commissioners Court. Her motion to transfer may be premised on a belief that only the district court may review that order.
The district court may exercise general supervisory control when the commissioners court (1) fails to perform a mandatory act; (2) performs an unauthorized act; or (3) abuses its discretion while undertaking an act it is authorized to perform. Henry v. Sullivan, 499 S.W.3d 545, 553 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] July 12, 2016, pet. filed) (op. on reh'g). A direct equitable action must be filed in the district court in order to invoke that court's jurisdiction to exercise supervisory control of the commissioners court. In re El Paso County Com'rs Court, 281 S.W.3d 16, 24 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2005, no pet.).
By seeking a transfer to the district court, appellant is not bringing a direct equitable action to review the 2004 commissioners court order; she is seeking review of the county court at law's January 30, 2017 judgment. Appellant has not cited any authority, nor do we know of any, suggesting the 2004 commissioners court order deprives this court of jurisdiction to review a final judgment from a county court at law. Accordingly, appellant's motion to transfer the case to district court is DENIED.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Boyce, Jamison, and Brown.