[ad_1]
March 22, 2024
Click to view PDF
Other reference numbers 24-9004 and 24-9005 – Published February 6, 2024
The Texas Supreme Court has given preliminary approval to proposed procedural rules for Texas’ new business courts and the 15th Court of Appeals. The public is invited to comment on the new rules and proposed amendments by May 1, 2024.
background:
Aiming to provide businesses in the growing Texas economy with a faster and more efficient dispute resolution mechanism, the Texas Legislature enacted House Bill 19, which provides specialized services designed to handle complex commercial disputes. created a business court. The law, now codified as Texas Government Code 25A, also provides for a new 15th Circuit Court of Appeals to hear appeals from business courts. Both courts will begin hearing the case on September 1, 2024.
As that date approaches, the Texas Supreme Court has given preliminary approval to a series of proposed rules and amendments governing procedure for the Business Court and the 15th Court of Appeals. The public is invited to submit comments on the proposed rule. [email protected] Otherwise, the proposed rules and amendments are expected to become effective on September 1, 2024.
Proposed Civil Procedure Rules for Texas Business Courts:
Rule 352 It states that to the extent consistent with the Business Courts’ new Rules of Practice, the General Rules of Civil Procedure, the Rules of Practice of District and County Courts, and the Rules on Ancillary Proceedings apply to the Business Courts.
Rule 354 It sets out requirements for business court arguments, challenges to venue and authority, and requests for transfer or dismissal. In particular, Rule 354 imposes additional pleading requirements on plaintiffs filing actions in business court. Plaintiffs seek to provide facts establishing the Business Court’s authority to hear cases and establishing venue in any county in the Business Court’s operating division. The proposed rules also give parties the right to challenge the business court’s authority and venue to hear the case. And the proposed rules provide that a business court may decide on its own that it does not have jurisdiction to hear a case, in which case the court may transfer the case to a district court or county court or issue a prejudgment. The lawsuit must be dismissed without prejudice.
Rule 355 We carry out procedures for transferring cases from the District Court or County Court to the Business Court. Under the proposed rules, a litigant must first notify the court in which the action is filed, identify the business court in which the action is to be dismissed, state the facts establishing that court’s authority and venue, and submit all The parties must state whether they agree to the withdrawal. If removal is contested, a litigant may seek removal from the time he discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, that the Business Court has jurisdiction to hear the case. is only 30 days. Similarly, a litigant contesting expulsion may be brought on remand within 30 days after the notice of expulsion is filed or, if the notice was filed prior to service on the party, within 30 days after the party appears. Procedures must be followed. A business court may independently determine that deletion is inappropriate.
Rule 356 Creates a mechanism for the originating court to request that the case be transferred to the business court. Under this proposed rule, if the court in which the case was originally filed believes that the business court has jurisdiction to hear the case, it will request the presiding judge of that administrative judicial area to transfer the case to the business court. be able to. Courts requesting transfer must notify the parties, and the presiding district judge may transfer the case if doing so “facilitates the fair and efficient administration of justice.” A party may file ex parte relief to challenge the judge’s denial of a motion to transfer.
Rule 357 Provides that if a business court dismisses an action or claim and a party to the action files the same action or claim in another court within 60 days, the applicable statute of limitations shall be suspended for the period between the filings. I am.
Rule 358 Business courts prohibit: I need A party or attorney appears electronically in a proceeding in which oral testimony is heard without the consent of the party. It is also prohibited to fully allow participants to appear electronically in jury trials. Apart from these prohibitions, the proposed regulations provide that Rule 21d governs remote proceedings.
Rule 359 The law requires business courts to issue written opinions on dispositional decisions upon request by a party and for decisions on important national issues. Otherwise, whether to issue an opinion is a matter of discretion.
Proposed Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure for the 15th Circuit Court of Appeals:
Rule 25.1The law establishing the procedure for perfecting an appeal will be amended to require litigants to provide additional information in their notice of appeal. The appellate party must include in its notice whether the appeal concerns the following issues: (1) Is it brought by or against a state agency? (2) brought by or against an officer or employee of the State and arising out of the official conduct of such person; (3) A party is challenging the constitutionality or validity of a state statute or regulation and the attorney general is a party to the case.
Rule 27a This law provides procedures for transferring appeals between appellate courts for cases wrongly brought to the Fifteenth Court of Appeals or for which the Fifteenth Court of Appeals has exclusive intermediate appellate jurisdiction. A party seeking transfer of an appeal must do so within 30 days after the appeal is completed and before the appellee files briefs. The filing party must immediately notify the court in which the appeal is pending (transfer court) and the court to which the party wishes to transfer the appeal (transfer court). The transferring court may transfer the appeal if (1) no party objects to the transfer within her 10 days of filing the motion, and (2) the transferring court consents to the transfer. Once the transferee court receives a decision from the transferor court, it must submit a letter to the transferor court explaining whether it agrees with the transferor court’s decision or not. The conveyancing court may also initiate this process on its own initiative. The Supreme Court must receive notice of all transfers. If a dispute arises between courts as to whether to transfer the appeal, the transferring court shall, unless there are special circumstances, issue a decision regarding the transfer dispute within 20 days after receiving the transferring court’s letter explaining the disagreement. Certain materials must be sent to the Texas Supreme Court. The Texas Supreme Court will then decide whether transfer is appropriate.
Implications of the proposed regulations and amendments:
- Starting in September 2024, parties will be able to file cases in the new Business Court and the 15th Circuit Court of Appeals. However, these new remedies have some procedural requirements that you should be aware of. Familiarity with these new procedural mechanisms will give litigants an advantage in both courts.
- In particular, litigants should be aware of the various removal and transfer mechanisms provided under the proposed rule. These mechanisms allow parties to move cases between the Business Court and the 15th Circuit, regardless of where the case was originally filed.
- Anyone wishing to comment on the new proposed rule has until May 1, 2024 to do so. Comments regarding the proposed new and amended rules should be submitted in writing to: [email protected].
The court’s opinion is available here.
The attorneys at Gibson Dunn are available to answer any questions you may have regarding developments before the Texas Supreme Court. Please feel free to contact the practical instructor below.
Appeals and constitutional practice
Related Practice: Texas Litigation
This alert was authored by Texas associates Elizabeth Kiernan, Stephen Hammer, John Adams, and Jamie Barrios.
© 2024 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP. All rights reserved. For contact information and other information, please visit www.gibsondunn.com.
Attorney Advertising: These materials have been prepared for general information purposes only on the basis of information available at the time of publication and are not intended to constitute legal advice or legal opinion regarding specific facts or law. They do not constitute or should be relied upon as such. situation. Gibson Dunn (and his affiliates, attorneys, and employees) assumes no liability whatsoever with respect to your use of these materials. Sharing of these materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship with recipient and should not be relied upon as a substitute for advice from a qualified attorney. Please note that facts and circumstances may differ and previous results do not guarantee similar results.
[ad_2]
Source link
