For the week of October 31, 2011, the Dallas Court of Appeals issued eighteen opinions in civil cases.  Fourteen of these dispose of a case without a detailed discussion of the merits (e.g., dismissing a case for want of prosecution, dismissing a case for mootness, dismissing a case pursuant to settlement).  The remaining four cases are as follows:

Dallas County v. Logan (05-11-00480-CV) – Recites well-established (1) standard for reviewing whether trial court had subject matter jurisdiction; and (2) rule that, under the common-law doctrine of sovereign immunity, the state cannot be sued without its consent.

Milwee-Jackson Joint Venture v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit (05-08-01164-CV) – Recites well-established (1) standard for reviewing traditional summary judgment; (2) standard for reviewing traditional summary judgment; (3) rule that, when both traditional and no-evidence summary motions for summary judgment are at issue, appellate court reviews no-evidence summary judgment first; (4) standard for reviewing whether access to property has been materially and substantially impaired; (5) statute of limitations applicable to inverse condemnation claims; (6) rule that sovereign immunity deprives a trial court of subject-matter jurisdiction for lawsuits in which the State or certain governmental units have been sued unless the State consents to suit; (7) rule that immunity from liability is an affirmative defense; and (8) elements of a “takings claim.”

Payberah v. Payberah (05-10-01098-CV) – Recites well-established (1) definition of the term “waiver”; and (2) rule that a reply brief may not be used to raise new issues on appeal.

Pediatrix Med. Group, Inc. v. Robinson (05-10-01546-CV) – Recites well-established standard for reviewing trial court’s decision with respect to expert reports required for health care liability claims.