Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type
Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type

DART v. Amalgamated Transit Union – Case Brief Summary (Texas)

In DART v. Amalgamated Transit Union, 273 S.W.3d 659, 660 (Tex. 2008), DART and its employees' union operated under a 13(c) arrangement. Id.

The court, in holding 13(c) did not preempt DART's immunity from suit under state law, noted that Texas law prohibits a state political subdivision from collective bargaining with public employees. Id. at 661 (citing Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 617.002(a), (b) (West 2012)).

The union in DART did not challenge the applicability of section 617.002. Id.

Thus, DART stands for the proposition that a 13(c) arrangement does not preempt the applicability of section 617.002. See id. at 660-61.