# Rosow v. City of San Antonio

> Texas Supreme Court · July 8, 1987 · 30 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 564

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9771783

## Case

- **Full name:** Jean ROSOW, Petitioner, v. CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, Respondent
- **Court:** Texas Supreme Court
- **Decided:** July 8, 1987
- **Citations:** 30 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 564; 734 S.W.2d 659; 1987 Tex. LEXIS 367
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Spears
- **Judges:** Ray, Spears, Wallace, Robertson, Mauzy
- **Cited by:** 7 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/9771783

## Opinion text

SPEARS, Justice,
concurring.
I concur in the majority’s opinion. The court of appeals erred in holding that Ro-sow’s suit was, in substance, a suit for review of an administrative decision requiring the application of the substantial evidence rule. Rosow pleaded her case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and presented evidence in support of that claim. The jury found for Rosow on her § 1983 issue. The City failed to object to any of these actions.
I concur in affirming the judgment of the trial court solely because the City failed to attack the issues of the propriety of her § 1983 claim, the evidence supporting it, or the accompanying jury issue; these were not preserved for review by the City.
The court’s opinion should not be read as recognizing that a § 1983 cause of action arises each time a municipal employee is terminated.
WALLACE, ROBERTSON and MAUZY, JJ., join in this concurring opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9771783. Public record. Not legal advice.