Many might have missed last week's opinion by the Fifteenth Court of Appeals in Texas Department of Insurance v. Thomas, which arose from an employment dispute involving TDI. But tucked in the opinion is a significant question of appellate jurisdiction: When an appeal includes one claim that falls within the Fifteenth Court’s exclusive jurisdiction, does the rest of the case come with it—even when there are claims falling outside the court's jurisdiction?

Deciding (Somewhat) the Question

The majority opinion by Chief Justice Brister held that the court could decide the entire appeal before it—including the plaintiff's Chapter 21 claim, which was expressly excluded from the court's exclusive jurisdiction—because the case also included ADA and FMLA claims against a state agency that fell within the court’s exclusive jurisdiction. The majority leaned on its general civil jurisdiction under Section 22.220(a) of the Texas Government Code and stressed that the statute should not be read to require separate appeals in separate courts of appeals arising from a single occurrence. But at the same time, the majority stopped short of answering the broader question: Does the Fifteenth Court also have jurisdiction over excluded claims arising from unrelated transactions or occurrences that are nonetheless tacked onto a qualifying appeal?

Justice Farris’s concurring opinion provides a simple answer to that question: “Yes.” In the concurrence's view, Section 22.220(d)(1) is best read as conferring jurisdiction over the entire “matter.” And “matter” means the whole appeal, not just the individual claim that triggers the statute. On that reading, one qualifying claim that fits subsection (d)(1) brings the rest of the case along with it—even if the appeal also includes claims that otherwise fall within one of subsection (d)(1)’s exclusions, factually related or not. In the concurrence's view, the Fifteenth Court's jurisdiction is case-based—not claim-based.