# Texas Southern University v. Araserve Campus Dining Services of Texas, Inc.

> Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston) · December 23, 1998 · 981 S.W.2d 929

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9678806

## Case

- **Full name:** TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY, Appellant, v. ARASERVE CAMPUS DINING SERVICES OF TEXAS, INC., Appellee
- **Court:** Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
- **Decided:** December 23, 1998
- **Citations:** 981 S.W.2d 929; 1998 WL 821709
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing
- **Judges:** Cohen, Hedges, Taft
- **Cited by:** 42 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/9678806

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- concluding TSU did not waive its right to assert immunity when its answer and plea to the jurisdiction stated the court was without jurisdiction absent a showing of waiver of the doctrine of sovereign immunity

## Opinion text

OPINION ON REHEARING
PER CURIAM.
On Motion for rehearing, Texas Southern University (TSU) argues for the first time that we should treat appellee’s contract and quasi-contract claims differently, because Tex. Const, art. Ill, § 44 precludes quasi-eontractual claims against the State. That is the opposite of what TSU argued to us in its brief, where it stated:
Because quantum meruit, unjust enrichment and detrimental reliance are remedies that imply a contract where none has in fact been created under law based on the parties’ conduct, for purposes of sovereign immunity analysis they are treated the same as a contract claim. ... Thus, although this section is stated in terms of a legal contract, it is intended to address all six (6) of Araserve’s contract and quasi-contract claims....
TSU’s motion for rehearing is DENIED.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9678806. Public record. Not legal advice.