Range Wins Appeal In Suit Against Texas Landowners
By Tom Korosec – Aug 24, 2012 11:00 PM CT
There is no way to tell what happened with this ruling by reading the article but what follows, with a little help from a friend, is my take.
The ruling is purely a procedural ruling and has nothing to do with the merits of the case. The appeals court ruled that it does not have the jurisdiction to hear an interim or interlocutory appeal because the case is not final at the trial court level. The appeal was only for the SLAPP ruling.
If there is a writ of mandamus, which is the thing I could not afford after Loftin ruled on my hearing,*Edit then the court of appeals can rule on just the piece of the case that is under appeal.
In this case, the court of appeals is treating it as a mandamus so they are still considering the merits of the case.
“I’m somewhat optimistic the court will consider our case at greater length,” Brent Rosenthal, a lawyer for the Lipskys, said in a phone interview. He said the appeals court will need to find “a clear abuse of discretion that cannot be rectified on appeal” to grant the writ of mandamus.
The Range attorneys say there was no “clear abuse of discretion.”
This reporter found a couple so I’m thinking the court of appeals might also.
It’s premature to declare victory.
Edit*It’s not exactly true that I could not afford the mandamus. At the time, Loftin was still the judge on the case. If the appeals court found that his ruling at my hearing was not a good ruling, they would return the case to him. In a nutshell: I would spend about $5K to be right back before a judge who obviously was not impartial. Throwing $5K away did not seem like a wise decision.
For more informaiton, see Fight Over Fracking and Flaming Water in Parker County Hits Snag in Appeals Court