IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

═════════_= 52;══

No. 04-0821

════════λ= 2;═══

Dallas Fire Fighters = Association, Ken Clower,

Brett Stidham, et = al.,=20 Petitioners,

City of Dallas,=20 Respondent

════════λ= 2;══════════&= #9552;═════════_= 52;══════════= ══════════ = 552;═

On Petition for Review from = the

Court of Appeals for the Fifth = District of=20 Texas

═════════_= 52;══════════= ══════════ = 552;══════════= ;══════════&#= 9552;

PER = CURIAM

The = Dallas=20 Fire Fighters Association and thirty-five individual firefighters, on = behalf of=20 themselves and a class of others similarly situated, sued the City of = Dallas for=20 breach of contract and for violation of the City=92s charter and civil = service=20 board rules in the City=92s use of an =93oral assessment test=94 = performed by an=20 outside contractor in making promotion decisions. Plaintiffs sought = declaratory=20 relief, injunctive relief, damages, and attorney=92s fees. On the = City=92s plea to=20 jurisdiction, based in part on governmental immunity, the trial court = dismissed=20 the action, and the court of appeals affirmed. ___ S.W.3d ___, ___ (Tex. = App.=97Dallas 2004) (mem. op.). Plaintiffs contended in part that = immunity was=20 waived by language in the City=92s charter, providing that the City may = =93sue and=20 be sued [and] implead and be impleaded in all courts,=94 Dallas, Tex., City Charter = Ch. II, =A7 1,=20 and by parallel language in section 51.075 of the Texas Local Government = Code.

As = we=20 explained in Tooke v. City of Mexia, 197 S.W.3d 325, 342 (Tex. = 2006),=20 which issued after plaintiffs filed their petition for review, this = language by=20 itself is not a clear and unambiguous waiver of immunity, but, while = these cases=20 were pending on appeal, the Legislature enacted sections = 271.151‑.160 of the=20 Texas Local Government Code, which waive immunity from suit for certain = claims=20 against local governmental entities, including municipalities. Sections=20 271.152‑.154 =93apply to a claim that arises under a contract = executed before=20 [September 1, 2005] . . . only if sovereign immunity has = not been=20 waived with respect to the claim=94 before that date. Act of May 23, = 2005, 79th=20 Leg., R.S., ch. 604, =A7 2, 2005 Tex. Gen. Laws 1548, 1549. The parties = should=20 have the opportunity to address these provisions, and any other = arguments they=20 may still have, in the trial court. See City of Sweetwater v. = Waddell,=20 ___ S.W.3d ___, ___ (Tex. 2007) (per curiam); City of Houston v. = Jones,=20 197 S.W.3d 391, 392 (Tex. 2006) (per curiam).

Accordingly,=20 we grant plaintiffs=92 petition for review, and without hearing oral = argument,=20 Tex. R. App. P. 59.1, = reverse the=20 judgment of the court of appeals and remand the case to the trial court = for=20 further proceedings.

Opinion=20 delivered: June 1, 2007