# Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. City of Houston

> Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston) · August 18, 2005 · 171 S.W.3d 240

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9652292

## Case

- **Full name:** The BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY, Appellant, v. the CITY OF HOUSTON, Texas, Appellee
- **Court:** Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)
- **Decided:** August 18, 2005
- **Citations:** 171 S.W.3d 240; 2005 WL 1118121
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Justice
- **Judges:** Leslie Brock Yates
- **Cited by:** 18 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9652292

## Opinion text

RICHARD H. EDELMAN Justice,
concurring.
The dismissal in this case could only properly be granted and affirmed based on a jurisdictional issue, such as governmental immunity from suit. Preemption is not *251 such an issue, either generally, 1 or in this particular case, because the county court will have subject matter jurisdiction over the condemnation action, even if some portions of the condemnation statute are preempted. Beyond recognizing that the dismissal cannot properly be affirmed on the preemption issue in any event (because it is not jurisdictional), any ruling in this appeal on preemption would go beyond the jurisdictional issues governing the dismissal to reach the merits of the underlying claims and thus be an advisory opinion which we have no jurisdiction to issue. 2 Therefore, our decision in this appeal should not address the preemption issue on the merits.
. See, e.g., Mills v. Warner Lambert Co., 157 S.W.3d 424, 427 (Tex.2005).
. See, e.g., McAllen Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Cortez, 66 S.W.3d 227, 232 (Tex.2001).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9652292. Public record. Not legal advice.