Opinion
No. 05-05-00456-CV
Opinion issued April 27, 2006.
On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 380-02982-04.
Affirmed.
Before Justices WRIGHT, O'NEILL, and FRANCIS.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Trend Offset Printing Services, Inc. appeals the trial court's order granting Collin County Community College District's plea to the jurisdiction. In two issues, appellant complains the trial court erred by (1) transferring venue to Collin County; and (2) granting appellee's plea to the jurisdiction. We overrule appellant's issues and affirm the trial court's order of dismissal.
Appellant contracted with appellee for appellant to print certain materials for appellee. Appellant performed the initial job and billed appellee. After appellee refused to pay, appellant filed suit for breach of contract in Dallas County. Appellee filed a motion to transfer venue to Collin County, which the trial court granted. Appellee then filed its plea to the jurisdiction claiming sovereign immunity. After a hearing, the trial court granted appellee's plea to the jurisdiction and dismissed the case for want of jurisdiction. This appeal followed.
In its first issue, appellant contends the trial court erred by granting appellee's motion to transfer venue because this case is not subject to section 15.035(a) of the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code and because Dallas County is a county of proper venue and therefore no other county can be a proper county of venue. However, appellee's motion asserted both section 15.035(a) and inconvenience under section 15.002 as grounds for transferring venue. The trial court granted the motion to transfer venue without stating its basis for doing so.
A trial court's ruling or decision to grant a transfer for convenience under section 15.002(b) "is not grounds for appeal or mandamus and is not reversible error." Tex. Civ. Prac. Rem. Code Ann. § 15.002(c) (Vernon 2002). Because appellee's motion asserted convenience as a ground for transfer and section 15.002(c) precludes reversal of any ruling on convenience grounds, we must affirm the trial court's order on convenience grounds. See Garza v. Garcia, 137 S.W.3d 36, 37 (Tex. 2004). We overrule appellant's first issue.
In its second issue, appellant contends the trial court erred by granting appellee's plea to the jurisdiction. According to appellant, appellee's immunity was waived by the "sue and be sued" language in section 11.151 of the Texas Education Code. This Court has analyzed and rejected this argument. See Satterfield Pontikes Constr., Inc. v. Irving Indep. Sch. Dist., 123 S.W.3d 63, 66-67 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2003, pet. filed) (concluding "sue and be sued" language found in section 11.151(a) of the Texas Education Code is not waiver of immunity). We decline appellant's invitation to revisit that holding. We overrule appellant's second issue.
Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's order dismissing this case for want of jurisdiction.