The Texas Supreme Court said a state trial court shouldn’t have h...
The Texas Supreme Court said a state trial court shouldn’t have heard a class action suit alleging SBC (now AT&T) improperly collected a state universal service fund surcharge. The state’s top court said the Public Utilities Commission had exclusive…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
primary jurisdiction over the plaintiffs’ claims and lower courts erred in not granting SBC’s motions to dismiss the suit and refer the case to the PUC. The ratepayer plaintiffs alleged SBC violated the state’s 2004 price cap regulation law when it continued collecting the state universal service fee, effectively imposing a prohibited rate increase for basic exchange service. SBC sought dismissal at a state trial court on ground the core claims were under the PUC’s primary jurisdiction, but the trial court refused to dismiss. SBC appealed but lost at the appellate level. It subsequently turned to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court (Case 05- 0951) said the trial court’s decision to proceed in an area where the PUC had exclusive primary jurisdiction “disrupted the orderly process of government.” It said the proper course was for the PUC to issue its ruling on the dispute, with trial courts having jurisdiction only after a party exhausted all administrative appeals at the PUC. It said the trial court in this case abused its judicial discretion by not dismissing the case.