State Immune From Suit for Injunction That Was Really a Claim for Monetary Relief
In In re C.S., the Third Court of Appeals has held that an ad litem's request for an injunction to remove "unconconstitutional barriers" to an adoption by increasing subsidies was really "an attempt to force the State to pay money to [the prospective adoptive parents] that the State is not willing to pay on its own volition." Because the State is immune from suits for money absent legislative consent, the Third Court reversed the trial court's denial of the State's plea to the jurisdiction and rendered judgment dismissing the claim.
