Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

Dallas County Cmty. College Dist. v. Bolton

Dallas County Cmty. College Dist. v. Bolton

Supreme Court of Texas

January 7, 2004, Argued ; December 2, 2005, Opinion Delivered

NO. 02-1110

Opinion

 [*870]  William H. Bolton II and other students sued the Dallas County Community College District over the imposition of fees charged by the District to fund technology purchases and to support student services, claiming that the fees were illegally imposed. The trial court certified a class of students who paid these fees. After a jury trial, the trial court entered a judgment awarding the Class approximately $ 15 million. The court of appeals applied a shorter two-year statute of limitations, limited the award of prejudgment interest, and accordingly ordered a reduction in the total amount of the recovery. It affirmed the remainder of the judgment. We hold that the Texas Education Code authorized the District to impose the technology fee. We further [**2]  conclude that the Class cannot seek repayment of the student services fee because the District established as a matter of law that the fee was a voluntary payment and the undisputed evidence did not establish that the fee was paid under duress to rebut the voluntary payment rule. We therefore reverse the court of appeals' judgment.

I. Factual and Procedural History

The Dallas County Community College District is a junior college district comprised of seven separate colleges which are Brookhaven, Cedar Valley, Eastfield, El Centro, Mountain View, North Lake, and Richland. Each of them operates independently under a president who reports to the Chancellor of the District. An elected seven-member Board of Trustees administers the District.

During the time period at issue in this case, the District charged a technology fee, intended to support the purchase of technology-related items for student use, and a student services fee, intended to fund extracurricular activities. In 1996, the technology fee was changed from a fixed fee of $ 10 per semester for all students to an amount set on a sliding scale of $ 2 per semester credit hour, with a minimum fee of $ 10 and a maximum fee [**3]  of $ 40 for each student per semester. A member of the student government at the Richland campus had previously proposed that the student services flat fee be increased. After consideration, the District in 1997 changed the student services fee from a flat fee of $ 10 per semester to a sliding scale that matched the technology fee--$ 2 per semester credit hour, with a minimum fee of $ 10 and a maximum fee of $ 40 per student.

On April 13, 1998, William H. Bolton II, Helen Bolton, Bruce Albright, Jason Grimes, and Daniel Martinez sued the Dallas County Community College District and its board of trustees, alleging that the fees were unlawfully imposed and seeking declaratory relief, damages, and attorney's fees arising from the collection of these student fees. The trial court certified a class of students who paid either the technology fee or the increased student services fee during the fall of 1997 or after, based on six or more credit hours taken.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

185 S.W.3d 868 *; 2005 Tex. LEXIS 870 **; 49 Tex. Sup. J. 180

DALLAS COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, ET AL., PETITIONERS, v. WILLIAM H. BOLTON II, ET AL., RESPONDENTS

Subsequent History: Rehearing denied by Dallas County Cmty. College Dist. v. Bolton, 2006 Tex. LEXIS 130 (Tex., Feb. 24, 2006)

Prior History: ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS.

Dallas County Comm. College Dist. v. Bolton, 89 S.W.3d 707, 2002 Tex. App. LEXIS 7449 (Tex. App. Dallas, 2002)

CORE TERMS

duress, junior college, technology, voluntary payment, matter of law, taxes, pledged, tuition, junior college district, revenue bond, trial court, reimbursement, authorizes, semester, refund, cases, summary judgment, illegal fee, volunteers, percent, protest, business compulsion, higher education, no evidence, involuntary, taxpayers, court of appeals, do business, bonds, voluntary-payment

Civil Procedure, Summary Judgment, Burdens of Proof, General Overview, Education Law, Administration & Operation, Postsecondary School Boards, Authority of Postsecondary Boards, School Districts, School District Creation, Tuition, Tuition Rates, Student Fees, Governments, Legislation, Interpretation, School Funding, Bonds & Other Indebtedness, State & Territorial Governments, Licenses, Finance, Administrative Law, Judicial Review, Reviewability, Questions of Law