Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion

When construing a = statute, we=20 look to the plain and common meaning of the statute=3Ds terms. = Tex.=20 Dep=3Dt of Transp. v. City = of Sunset=20 Valley, 146=20 S.W.3d 637, 642 (Tex. 2004). We read the statute as a whole = and not=20 just isolated portions. Id. AIf the statutory = language is=20 unambiguous, we must interpret it according to its terms, giving = meaning=20 to the language consistent with other provisions in the=20 statute.@ Id.; = see also=20 Tex. Gov=3Dt Code Ann. = ' 311.011(a) (Vernon = 2005)=20 (AWords and phrases = shall be read=20 in context and construed according to the rules of grammar and = common=20 usage.@).

Section 15.015 is a = mandatory=20 venue provision and, under the venue statutes, mandatory venue = provisions=20 control over permissive venue provisions. See Tex. = Civ. Prac.=20 & Rem. Code Ann.=20 ' 15.001 (Vernon 2002) = (defining=20 Aproper = venue@ as that Arequired by the = mandatory=20 provisions of Subchapter B [here, section 15.015] or another = statute=20 prescribing mandatory venue@); Wichita County = v.=20 Hart, 917 S.W.2d 779, 781 (Tex. 1996). However, section=20 15.062(a) expressly states that venue of the main action = Ashall@ establish venue of a = third-party claim. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. ' 15.062. = Further, there=20 is no express requirement in section 15.062(a) that venue be = Aproper@ in the main = action. =20 Compare Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. ' 15.062(a) = with Tex.=20 Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. ' 15.005 (AIn a suit in which = the=20 plaintiff has established proper venue against a defendant, the = court also=20 has venue of all the defendants in all claims or actions arising = out of=20 the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or=20 occurrences.@). The only = express=20 requirement under section 15.062(a) is that the third-party claim = be=20 Aproperly = joined,@ which is not = contested=20 here. Id. ' 15.062(a). = Consequently,=20 giving effect to the plain language of both venue provisions = involved,=20 sections 15.015 and 15.062(a) apply to different circumstances = and, when a=20 third-party defendant is involved, section 15.062(a) dictates that = venue=20 is established by the main action. This interpretation not = only=20 gives effect to the plain language of both venue provisions, but = it is=20 also supported in the case law. See, e.g., = McIntosh v.=20 Copeland, 894 S.W.2d 60, 64 (Tex. App.CAustin 1995, writ = denied)=20 (concluding that a third-party contribution and indemnity claim = cannot=20 establish venue for the main action).

In its reply, the = County=20 distinguishes McIntosh v. Copeland by claiming that section = 15.062(b) was enacted by the legislature in response to that = case. =20 As the County interprets section 15.062(b), venue is proper over a = third-party defendant only when the plaintiff could have sued that = third-party defendant directly. Subsection (b) provides as=20 follows: