Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Examiners v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Texas, Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750 (Tex. App. 2000). · Go Syfert
Search
Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Examiners v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Texas, Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750 (Tex. App. 2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 7× by 7 distinct cases, 2004–2015↓ Fading · …files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the apa and may not seek relief under the udja because such relief would be redundant. at p. 753 ✓
cited 4× by 4 distinct cases, 2009–2020↓ Fading · …when a plaintiff files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the apa and may not seek relief under the udja because such relief would be redundant. at p. 753 ✓
105 citation events (105 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: John Gannon, Inc. v. the Texas Department of Transportation James M. Bass, in His Official Capacity as Executive Director of the Texas Department of Transportation And Kyle Madsen, in His Official Capacity as Director of Right of Way for the Texas Department of Transportation (texapp, 2020-10-09)
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) John Gannon, Inc. v. the Texas Department of Transportation James M. Bass, in His Official Capacity as Executive Director of the Texas Department of Transportation And Kyle Madsen, in His Official Capacity as Director of Right of Way for the Texas Department of Transportation
Tex. App. · 2020 · confidence medium
Safety v. Salazar, No. 03-11-00478-CV, 2013 WL 5878905 , at *9 (Tex. App.—Austin Oct. 31, 2013, pet. denied) (mem. op.) (concluding that redundant remedies doctrine bars UDJA claim when relief sought “is essentially the same as the relief that they sought through their [APA] claims” and that “a party may not seek relief under the [UDJA] when that relief is redundant to relief available under the [APA]”); Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.) (“When a…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Texas Department of Insurance v. Texas Association of Health Plans
Tex. App. · 2020 · confidence medium
Exam’rs v. Texas Orthopaedic Ass’n, No. 03-04-00253-CV, 2004 WL 2556917 (Tex. App.—Austin Nov. 12, 2004, no pet.) (mem. op.); Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 752 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.); Texas Alcoholic Beverage Comm’n v. Amusement & Music Operators of Tex., Inc., 997 S.W.2d 651, 656 (Tex. App.—Austin 1999, pet. dism’d w.o.j.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hegar v. Autohaus LP
Tex. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
Co. v. City of Hous., 487 S.W.3d 154, 161-64 (Tex. 2016) (describing and clarifying ultra vires doctrine); Patel v. Texas Dep’t of Licensing & Regulation, 469 S.W.3d 69, 77 (Tex. 2015) (concluding that ultra vires exception to immunity did not apply because challenge was to “the validity of the cosmetology statutes and regulations, rather than complaining that officials illegally acted or failed to act”); Sefzik, 355 S.W.3d at 618 (recognizing that “state may be a proper party to a declaratory judgment action that challenges the validity of a statute”); Heinrich, 284 S.W.3d at 372 (d…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) City of Leander Kent Cagle, Individually and in His Official Capacity as City Manager of the City of Leander and Thomas Yantis, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Assistant City Manager and Planning Director for the City of Leander v. Premas Global Leander I, LLC (2×)
Tex. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
Com’n, 260 S.W.3d 647, 650 (Tex. App.- Austin 2008, no pet.)………………………………………………...……………33 Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Examiners v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Texas, Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.-Austin 2000, pet. abated) …………………………………………………………………….……...33 Texas S. Univ. v. State St.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Abbott v. G.G.E
Tex. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
It is true that when a party “files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant.” See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.); see also Canyon Reg’l Water Auth. v. Guadalupe-Bianco River Auth., 286 S.W.3d 397, 407 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 2008, no pet.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Greg Abbott, in His Official Capacity as Governor of the State of Texas Kyle Janek, in His Official Capacity as Executive Commissioner of the Texas Health and Human Services Commission Jon Weizenbaum, in His Official Capacity as Commissioner of The v. G.G.E., E.M.B., and G.D.E Through Their Next Friend, Geoffrey Courtney And Disability Rights Texas
Tex. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
Id. 30 bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant.” See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.); see also Canyon Reg’l Water Auth. v. Guadalupe-Blanco River Auth., 286 S.W.3d 397, 407 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2008, no pet.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) the City of San Antonio v. the Rogers Shavano Ranch, Ltd., Rogers 1604 Commercial, Ltd., Bitterblue, Inc., and Denton Development Corporation
Tex. App. · 2014 · confidence medium
CODE ANN. § 33.171(a) (West 2011). - 10 - 04-13-00623-CV would be redundant.” 7 Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Examiners v. Associated Plumbing-Heating- Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Texas Department of Public Safety Steve McGraw, in His Official Capacity as Director of the Texas Department of Public Safety Allan B. Polunsky, in His Official Capacity as Chairman of the Public Safety Commission v. Miguel Salazar Edgar Soria Francisco Avila Trejo Green Meadows Landscaping, Inc. Merida Flores Nader Dalo Godofredo A. Orellana And Ruwaidha Liwaza
Tex. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
Accountancy v. Bass, No. 03-09-00251-CV, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 294 , at *28-29 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 14, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing constitutional declaratory claim because it was “essentially duplicative of the relief” sought under Administrative Procedure Act); SWEPI LP v. Railroad Comm’n, 314 S.W.3d 253, 268-69 (Tex. App.—Austin 2010, pet. denied) (concluding that party’s declaratory claims were redundant of administrative claims when both sets of claims were “based upon the same statutory construction arguments”); Salazar, 304 S.W.3d at 906 n.7 (dismissing plaint…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hot-Hed, Inc. v. Safehouse Habitats (Scotland), Ltd.
Tex. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.-Austin 2000, pet. dism’d)); see also City of Houston v. Texan Land & Cattle Co., 138 S.W.3d 382, 392 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (holding that party may not use declaratory judgment action to seek same relief afforded under another of its causes of action to obtain otherwise impermissible attorney’s fees).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hot-Hed, Inc., and Cinaruco International, S.A. v. Safehouse Habitats (Scotland), LTD.
Tex. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d)); see also City of Houston v. Texan Land & Cattle Co. , 138 S.W.3d 382, 392 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (holding that party may not use declaratory judgment action to seek same relief afforded under another of its causes of action to obtain otherwise impermissible attorney’s fees).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) City of Carrollton v. RIHR INC.
Tex. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.-Austin 2000, pet. dism’d); see also City of Houston v. Texan Land & Cattle Co., 138 S.W.3d 382, 392 (Tex.App.Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (party may not use declaratory judgment action to seek same relief afforded under another of its causes of action to obtain otherwise impermissible attorney’s fees).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Canyon Regional Water Authority v. Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, and Margaret Hoffman in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Tex. App. · 2008 · confidence medium
It is true that when a party “files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant.” Tex. State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.–Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.) (emphasis added).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Canyon Regional Water Authority v. Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, and Margaret Hoffman in Her Official Capacity as Executive Director of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Tex. App. · 2008 · confidence medium
It is true that when a party "files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant." Tex. State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.-Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.) (emphasis added).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Canyon Regional Water Authority v. Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority
Tex. App. · 2008 · confidence medium
It is true that when a party “files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant.” Tex. State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.-Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.) (emphasis added).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Les Eckert and Aberdeen Insurance Services, Inc. v. Jose Montemayor, in His Official Capacity as Commissioner of Insurance for the State of Texas and Texas Department of Insurance
Tex. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
See Hageman v. Luth , 150 S.W.3d 617, 627 (Tex. App.—Austin 2004, no pet.); Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Les Eckert and Aberdeen Insurance Services, Inc. v. Jose Montemayor, in His Official Capacity as Commissioner of Insurance for the State of Texas and Texas Department of Insurance
Tex. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
See Hageman v. Luth, 150 S.W.3d 617, 627 (Tex. App.—Austin 2004, no pet.); Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Howell v. Texas Workers' Compensation Commission
Tex. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
When a party “files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant.” Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.~Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.) (emphasis added).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Robert S. Howell, D.C. First Rio Valley Medical, P.A. Keith Gilbert William Maxwell And Gilbert & Maxwell, P.L.L.C. v. Texas Workers' Compensation Commission Envoy Medical Systems, L.L.C. Texas Mutual Insurance Company State Office of Risk Management and Continental Casualty Insurance Company
Tex. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
When a party "files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant." Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.) (emphasis added).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Robert S. Howell, D.C. First Rio Valley Medical, P.A. Keith Gilbert William Maxwell And Gilbert & Maxwell, P.L.L.C. v. Texas Workers' Compensation Commission Envoy Medical Systems, L.L.C. Texas Mutual Insurance Company State Office of Risk Management and Continental Casualty Insurance Company
Tex. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
When a party “files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant.” Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.) (emphasis added).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Robert Hageman/Fritz, Byrne, Head & Harrison, L.L.P. v. Thomas Luth And Fritz, Byrne, Head & Harrison, L.L.P./Robert Hageman (2×) also: Cited "see"
Tex. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hageman/Fritz, Byrne, Head & Harrison, L.L.P. v. Luth (2×) also: Cited "see"
Tex. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.- Austin 2000 , pet. dism’d by agr.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Robert Hageman/Fritz, Byrne, Head & Harrison, L.L.P. v. Thomas Luth And Fritz, Byrne, Head & Harrison, L.L.P./Robert Hageman (2×) also: Cited "see"
Tex. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam=rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.CAustin 2000, pet. dism=d by agr.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Robert Hageman/Fritz, Byrne, Head & Harrison, L.L.P. v. Thomas Luth And Fritz, Byrne, Head & Harrison, L.L.P./Robert Hageman (2×) also: Cited "see"
Tex. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.-- Austin 2000 , pet. dism'd by agr.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Tim Jamail v. the City of Cedar Park (2×)
Tex. App. · 2001 · confidence medium
Oake v. Collin County , 692 S.W.2d 454, 455 (Tex. 1985); Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. denied); McCarthy Bros.
discussed Cited "see" Texas Telephone Association and Texas Statewide Telephone Cooperative, Inc., and Their Participating Members Windstream Services, LLC Texas Windstream, LLC (d/B/A Windstream Communications) Windstream Communications Kerrville, LLC (d/B/A Windstream Communications) Valor Telecommunications of Texas, LLC (d/B/A Windstream Communications Southwest) Windstream Sugar Land LLC v. Public Utility Commission of Texas Peter Lake, Chairman Will McAdams, Commissioner Lori Cobos, Commissioner And Jimmy Glotfelty, Commissioner, Each in His or Her Official Capacity at the Public Utility Commission of Texas
Tex. App. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See 38 Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 754 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.) (affirming trial court’s order that Board must pay attorneys’ fees and holding that trial court’s construction of statute to determine and declare contract void and to enjoin party from specific action constituted more than mere resolution of challenge to validity of Board’s administrative rule and thus UDJA claim was not solely vehicle to recover attorneys’ fees).
examined Cited "see" Caroldene Cahill v. Mark Cahill (5×)
Tex. App. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See id. at 751-53 .
discussed Cited "see" John Doe v. Board of Directors of the State Bar of Texas Commission for Lawyer Discipline And Linda Acevedo, in Her Official Capacity as the Chief Disciplinary Counsel of the State Bar of Texas
Tex. App. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing–Heating–Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.-Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.) (“When a plaintiff files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant.”). 8 For the same reason, even if we considered Gomez's rule challenge to be a valid ultra vires claim under the UDJA, he has failed to establish a justiciable controversy and therefore lacks standing under the U…
cited Cited "see" Stuart Thomas Gerstacker v. Kimberly Ann Gerstacker
Tex. App. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.).
cited Cited "see" Austin Engineering Co., Inc. v. Susan Combs, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas, and Greg Abbott, Attorney General of the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.).
discussed Cited "see" Texas Department of Public Safety v. Salazar
Tex. App. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.-Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.) (“When a plaintiff files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant.''). 8 .
discussed Cited "see" Bruce Wayne Houser v. Douglas Dretke, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice
Tex. App. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.) (“When a plaintiff files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant.”). 13 Green Meadows alleges that it relies on H-2B workers in conducting its landscaping business, and that due to the seasonal nature of its business, the H-2B visas it requests for its workers are valid for …
discussed Cited "see" Texas Department of Public Safety Lt. Col. Lamar Beckworth, in His Official Capacity as Interim Director of the Texas Department of Public Safety And Allan B. Polunsky, in His Official Capacity as Chairman of the Public Safety Commission v. Miguel Salazar Edgar Soria Francisco Avila Trejo Green Meadows Landscaping, Inc. Eustolio Galvan And Jose Gomez
Tex. App. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.) ("When a plaintiff files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant."). 8.
discussed Cited "see" Combs v. TEXAS ENTERTAINMENT ASS'N, INC.
Tex. App. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.-Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.) ("It is an abuse of discretion ... to award attorney's fees under the UDJA when the statute is relied upon solely as a vehicle to recover attorney's fees.").
discussed Cited "see" Combs v. Texas Entertainment Ass'n, Inc.
Tex. App. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.-Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.) (“It is an abuse of discretion ... to award attorney’s fees under the UDJA when the statute is relied upon solely as a vehicle to recover attorney’s fees.”).
discussed Cited "see" Susan Combs, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Texas, and Greg Abbott, Attorney General of the State of Texas v. Texas Entertainment Association, Inc. and Karpod, Inc.
Tex. App. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.) ("It is an abuse of discretion . . . to award attorney's fees under the UDJA when the statute is relied upon solely as a vehicle to recover attorney's fees.").
discussed Cited "see" C.B. v. D.S.
Tex. App. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.) (“It is an abuse of discretion . . . to award attorney’s fees under the UDJA when the statute is relied upon solely as a vehicle to recover attorney’s fees.”).
cited Cited "see" Parker Barber & Beauty Supply, Inc. v. the Wella Corporation, Donald German and Stephen Crawford
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc ., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.) 3.
discussed Cited "see" Parker Barber & Beauty Supply, Inc. v. the Wella Corporation, Donald German and Stephen Crawford
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.) 10 Motion for Extension of Time Parker claims in its second issue that the trial court erred by failing to grant Parker an extension of time to conduct additional depositions before responding to Wella’s summary judgment motion.
discussed Cited "see" Edwards Aquifer Authority Gregory M. Ellis, General Manager of the Authority, in His Official Capacity And Carol Patterson, Michael Beldon, Levi Jackson, Rafael Zendejas, Susan Hughes, Doug Miller, Ken Barnes, in Their Official Capacities v. Chemical Lime, Ltd.
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.); University of Tex. v. Ables , 914 S.W.2d 712, 717 (Tex. App.--Austin 1996, no writ).
discussed Cited "see" Edwards Aquifer Authority Gregory M. Ellis, General Manager of the Authority, in His Official Capacity And Carol Patterson, Michael Beldon, Levi Jackson, Rafael Zendejas, Susan Hughes, Doug Miller, Ken Barnes, in Their Official Capacities v. Chemical Lime, Ltd.
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.); University of Tex. v. Ables, 914 S.W.2d 712, 717 (Tex. App.—Austin 1996, no writ).
discussed Cited "see" Edwards Aquifer Authority v. Chemical Lime, Ltd.
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.-Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.); University of Tex. v. Ables, 914 S.W.2d 712, 717 (Tex.App.-Austin 1996, no writ).
discussed Cited "see" Aaron Rents, Inc. v. Travis Central Appraisal District (2×)
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Raytheon E-Sys., 101 S.W.3d at 572 (citing Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex.App.-Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.)).
discussed Cited "see" Aaron Rents, Inc. v. Travis Central Appraisal District, Travis County Appraisal Review Board, and Travis County Tax Assessor Collector, Nelda Wells Spears, in Her Official Capacity
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Raytheon E-Sys. , 101 S.W.3d at 572 (citing Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc ., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.).
discussed Cited "see" Aaron Rents, Inc. v. Travis Central Appraisal District, Travis County Appraisal Review Board, and Travis County Tax Assessor Collector, Nelda Wells Spears, in Her Official Capacity
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Raytheon E-Sys., 101 S.W.3d at 572 (citing Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.).
discussed Cited "see" Edwards Aquifer Authority Gregory M. Ellis, General Manager of the Authority, in His Official Capacity And Carol Patterson, Michael Beldon, Levi Jackson, Rafael Zendejas, Susan Hughes, Doug Miller, Ken Barnes, in Their Official Capacities v. Chemical Lime, Ltd.
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.); University of Tex. v. Ables, 914 S.W.2d 712, 717 (Tex. App.—Austin 1996, no writ).
discussed Cited "see" Edwards Aquifer Authority Gregory M. Ellis, General Manager of the Authority, in His Official Capacity And Carol Patterson, Michael Beldon, Levi Jackson, Rafael Zendejas, Susan Hughes, Doug Miller, Ken Barnes, in Their Official Capacities v. Chemical Lime, Ltd.
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.); University of Tex. v. Ables , 914 S.W.2d 712, 717 (Tex. App.--Austin 1996, no writ).
discussed Cited "see" Aaron Rents, Inc. v. Travis Central Appraisal District, Travis County Appraisal Review Board, and Travis County Tax Assessor Collector, Nelda Wells Spears, in Her Official Capacity
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Raytheon E-Sys., 101 S.W.3d at 572 (citing Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.).
discussed Cited "see" Aaron Rents, Inc. v. Travis Central Appraisal District, Travis County Appraisal Review Board, and Travis County Tax Assessor Collector, Nelda Wells Spears, in Her Official Capacity
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Raytheon E-Sys. , 101 S.W.3d at 572 (citing Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc ., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.).
discussed Cited "see" Edwards Aquifer Authority Gregory M. Ellis, General Manager of the Authority, in His Official Capacity And Carol Patterson, Michael Beldon, Levi Jackson, Rafael Zendejas, Susan Hughes, Doug Miller, Ken Barnes, in Their Official Capacities v. Chemical Lime, Ltd.
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam'rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc. , 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. dism'd by agr.); University of Tex. v. Ables , 914 S.W.2d 712, 717 (Tex. App.--Austin 1996, no writ).
discussed Cited "see" Edwards Aquifer Authority Gregory M. Ellis, General Manager of the Authority, in His Official Capacity And Carol Patterson, Michael Beldon, Levi Jackson, Rafael Zendejas, Susan Hughes, Doug Miller, Ken Barnes, in Their Official Capacities v. Chemical Lime, Ltd.
Tex. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Texas State Bd. of Plumbing Exam’rs v. Associated Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors of Tex., Inc., 31 S.W.3d 750, 753 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. dism’d by agr.); University of Tex. v. Ables, 914 S.W.2d 712, 717 (Tex. App.—Austin 1996, no writ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
TEXAS STATE BOARD OF PLUMBING EXAMINERS, Appellant,
v.
ASSOCIATED PLUMBING-HEATING-COOLING CONTRACTORS OF TEXAS, INC., Appellee
03-00-00328-CV.
Court of Appeals of Texas.
Oct 26, 2000.
31 S.W.3d 750
Kurt H. Kuhn, Office of the Solicitor General, Austin, for Appellant., Hector Deleon, Deleon, Boggins & Ice-nogle, P.C., Austin, for Appellee.
Jones, Kidd, Yeakel.
Cited by 59 opinions  |  Published
KIDD, Justice.

Associated Plumbing Heating Cooling Contractors of Texas, Inc. sued the Texas State Board of Plumbing Examiners. Following a non-jury trial, the district court rendered judgment in favor of Associated Plumbing. On appeal, the Board complains about only one aspect of the judgment — that the Board pay Associated[*752] Plumbing’s attorney’s fees. The Board contends that attorney’s fees are not recoverable as a matter of law because the underlying proceeding was substantively only an administrative rule challenge governed exclusively by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which does not provide for recovery of attorney’s fees. We will affirm the district court’s judgment.

Background

Associated Plumbing is a non-profit Texas association that has been approved by the Board as a provider for mandatory continuing professional education (MCPE) for licensed plumbers in the state. On September 13, 1999, acting pursuant to provisions in the Plumbing License Law, [1] the Board adopted a revision to its rule regarding MCPE to be effective October 5, 1999. The revision provided that the Board would be the sole provider of the textbook for MCPE in Texas. See 22 Tex.Admin.Code § 365.14 (2000). Additionally, the revision prohibited any entity other than the Board from developing, producing, or distributing the MCPE textbook. Id. Finally, the revision would allow the Board to enter into an interagency contract with another state agency to develop, produce, and distribute the MCPE textbook. Id. At the same meeting, the Board voted to enter into an interagency contract with the Texas Engineering Extension Service, a division of Texas A & M University, to act as the sole provider to develop, produce, and distribute the MCPE textbook. The Board approved the Engineering Extension Service as a provider of MCPE materials and on November 11, the Board and the Engineering Extension Service executed their inter-agency contract.

Associated Plumbing commenced the underlying proceeding pursuant to provisions in the Texas Constitution, the APA and the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act (UDJA). See Tex. Const, art. 5, § 8; Tex.Gov’t Code Ann. § 2001.038 (West 2000); Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 37.004 (West 1997). In the proceeding, Associated Plumbing: (1) asked the district court to construe the statute governing the Board and resolve conflicts, if any, between sections 5(d) and 12B [2] ; (2) challenged the revision to the Board’s rules at section 365.14, sought to have the revision declared invalid, and asked the court to enjoin its promulgation; (3) asked the district court to declare the interagency contract executed by the Board and the Engineering Extension Service void; and (4) asked the district court to enjoin the Engineering Extension Service from serving as a provider for the MCPE programs for licensed plumbers. Additionally, Associated Plumbing sought recovery of its attorney’s fees from the Board pursuant to the UDJA. See Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem.Code Ann. § 37.009 (West 1997).

In the judgment, the district court made several declarations: (1) no conflicts exist between sections 5(d) and 12B of article 6243-101; (2) the MCPE program must be provided by an individual, business, or association approved by the Board; (3) the Board was without statutory authority to adopt the revision; (4) the revision was invalid; (5) the Engineering Extension Service was not a proper entity to serve as a MCPE provider under section 12B of article 6243-101; and (6) the Engineering Extension Service may not serve as a provider for the MCPE programs for licensed plumbers. Additionally, the district court enjoined the Board from: (1) instituting the revision; (2) implementing the inter-agency agreement with the Engineering Extension Service that would grant it the exclusive right to develop, publish, and distribute material for the MCPE program; and (3) prohibiting Associated Plumbing from developing, publishing, and[*753] distributing materials conforming to the criteria to be adopted by the Board for the MCPE program for plumbers. Finally, the district court ordered the Board to pay Associated Plumbing’s attorney’s fees.

Discussion

The Board appeals only the award of attorney’s fees and contends that the entire proceeding was governed by the APA; therefore, it argues attorney’s fees were not recoverable as a matter of law. The Board argues that Associated Plumbing included a claim under the UDJA only to recover attorney’s fees and that Associated Plumbing was not “entitled to attach a redundant declaratory judgment action” solely to recover attorney’s fees. The Board argues that the substantive issue in the proceeding was a challenge to the validity of an administrative rule, and as a matter of law, the district court abused its discretion by ordering the Board to pay Associated Plumbing’s attorney’s fees.

Associated Plumbing does not dispute the fact that attorney’s fees are not recoverable in an APA declaratory judgment action. See Tex.Gov’t Code Ann. § 2001.038. Associated Plumbing’s response to the Board’s argument is that the proceeding involved more than simply a rule challenge regarding the Board’s revision to section 865.14. Associated Plumbing contends that in addition to determining the validity of the rule, it also sought a declaration under the UDJA that the Board had no authority to designate the Engineering Extension Service as the exclusive developer for MCPE materials and, further, the Board’s contract with the Engineering Extension System was invalid.

Attorney’s fees are recoverable only when provided for by statute or by the parties’ agreement. Dallas Cent. Appraisal Dist. v. Seven Inv. Co., 835 S.W.2d 75, 77 (Tex.1992). A party proceeding under the UDJA may recover its attorney’s fees. Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem .Code Ann. § 37.009. The grant or denial of attorney’s fees under the UDJA is within the district court’s discretion and its order will not be reversed on appeal absent a showing that the court abused its discretion. Oake v. Collin County, 692 S.W.2d 454, 455 (Tex.1985); Del Valle Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Lopez, 863 S.W.2d 507, 513 (Tex.App.—Austin 1993, writ denied). The legal principle encompassed in the term “abuse of discretion” concerns a legal error committed by the district court in its award of attorney’s fees that injured or prejudiced appellants. Lopez, 863 S.W.2d at 513. A question of legal error is reviewed de novo. State v. Heal, 917 S.W.2d 6, 9 (Tex.1996); Mayberry v. Texas Dep’t of Agric., 948 S.W.2d 312, 314 (Tex.App.—Austin 1997, pet. denied).

When a plaintiff files a proceeding that only challenges the validity of an administrative rule, the parties are bound by the APA and may not seek relief under the UDJA because such relief would be redundant. Texas Educ. Agency v. Leeper, 893 S.W.2d 432, 443-44 (Tex.1994) (plaintiff not only challenging administrative order, therefore, proceeding not governed solely by APA); Young Chevrolet, Inc. v. Texas Motor Vehicle Bd., 974 S.W.2d 906, 911 (Tex.App.—Austin 1998, pet. denied). This proposition is consistent with appellate-court holdings that have concluded it is an abuse of discretion to award attorney’s fees under the UDJA when the relief sought is no greater than relief that otherwise exists by agreement or statute. See Boatman v. Lites, 970 S.W.2d 41, 43 (Tex.App.—Tyler 1998, no pet.); University of Texas v. Ables, 914 S.W.2d 712, 717 (Tex.App.—Austin 1996, no writ). It is an abuse of discretion, therefore, to award attorney’s fees under the UDJA when the statute is relied upon solely as a vehicle to recover attorney’s fees. Southwest Guar. Trust Co. v. Hardy Road 134 Joint Venture, 981 S.W.2d 951, 956 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1998, pet. denied); Whiteside v. Griffis & Griffis, P.C., 902 S.W.2d 739, 747 (Tex.App.—Austin 1995, writ denied).

[*754] We agree with the Board that the district court’s construction of sections 5(d) and 12B of article 6243-101 was central to determining the validity of the revision under the APA. See Texas Alcoholic Beverage Comm’n v. Amusement & Music Operators of Tex., Inc., 997 S.W.2d 651, 658 (Tex.App.—Austin 1999 pet. dism’d w.o.j.). The district court, however, not only construed the statute to determine that there were no conflicts and that the rule was invalid, but also construed the statute to determine and declare the contract between the Board and the Engineering Extension Service void. Further, the district court enjoined the Engineering Extension Service from serving as a provider of materials for MCPE programs. We hold that these acts went beyond merely challenging an administrative rule. Because the proceeding was not solely a challenge to the Board’s revision of its rules, we hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the Board to pay Associated Plumbing’s attorney’s fees.

The Board’s issue is overruled and the district court’s judgment is affirmed.

1

. See Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 6243-101 §§ 5(d), 12B (West Supp.2000).

2

. These sections address voluntary and mandatory continuing education programs for plumbers and also delineate the Board’s powers regarding these programs.