In Texas Department of Parks and Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217, 227 (Tex. 2004), the supreme court explained that when a dilatory plea, such as a plea to the jurisdiction or similar procedural device, challenges the existence of material facts supporting jurisdiction, the court must consider the relevant evidence submitted by the parties. If the evidence is undisputed or fails to raise a question of fact, the court should rule on the plea as a matter of law. Id. at 228. After a defendant asserts, and supports with evidence, that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the plaintiff must show a disputed fact issue exists in order to avoid dismissal for want of jurisdiction. Id. The court further explained that the standard for such jurisdictional disputes "generally mirrors that of a traditional summary judgment." Id.