Lack of Market Justified Extension of Surface Coal Mining Permit
In Railroad Commission of Texas v. Coppock (on motion for rehearing), the Third Court of Appeals has reversed a district court's determination that the Commission's basis for extending a surface coal mining permit that the miner lacked a market for selling its coal was not authorized under the Texas Natural Resources Code.
The merits of this case are something only an administrative lawyer could love. A straightforward procedural issue is what grabbed my attention. The Third Court panel glossed over the appellants' position that an argument characterized as an independent ground for affirmance could not be heard because the appellees did not file their own notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.1. Instead of deciding whether Rule 25.1 was in play, the panel addressed the merits of the appellants' argument "[i]n the interests of justice." What's more, because the court reversed on another ground, the entire discussion is arguably dicta.
