In re Republican Party of Texas
Texas Supreme Court
2020 WL 4001050 (2020)
- Written by Tanya Munson, JD
Facts
The Republican Party of Texas (the Republican Party) (plaintiff) planned on hosting its biennial state convention at the George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston. The Republican Party contracted with Houston First Corporation (defendant) to secure the venue for May 2020. In March of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic erupted in the United States. Various emergency orders caused the Republican Party and Houston First to amend their agreement to ensure the use of the convention center for a delayed date of July 13 to July 18, 2020. The Republican Party and Houston First had been in contact to discuss safety measures to be put in place during the convention. The mayor of Houston, Sylvester Turner (defendant), expressed concerns about the event and indicated he would begin enforcing orders prohibiting large gatherings. On July 7, 2020, Mayor Turner requested that the Republican Party cancel the convention. The Republican Party refused. At the urging of Mayor Turner, Houston First sent a letter to the Republican Party stating that it was canceling the contract based on the contract’s force majeure clause, citing the “unprecedented scope and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in Houston.” The Republican Party filed suit in district court against Mayor Turner and Houston First, alleging that Houston First had breached the agreement, and sought a temporary restraining order and a temporary injunction prohibiting termination and requiring specific performance. The trial court denied the Republican Party’s applications. On July 20, the Republican Party petitioned for mandamus to direct Houston First to perform its contractual obligations. The Republican Party invoked Section 273.061 of the Election Code, which gives the court jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus to compel the performance of “any duty imposed by law” in connection with a political party convention.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
Dissent (Devine, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.