The definitions in our glossary are primarily sourced from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary and Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. We have made slight modifications where needed for brevity and to better tailor the definitions to the specific needs of users of this website. For more detailed explanations of the terms, users are encouraged to review the definitions on these websites or conduct their own independent research.
CASE NAME
Landscape Consultants of Texas, Inc. et al v. City of Houston, Texas et al
Overview
Plaintiffs challenge the city of Houston's contracting program, alleging that the city gives “preference” to minority-owned businesses.
Details
Defendant City of Houston filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that Co-Defendant Midtown Management District (MMD) is separate from the city and that Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim against the city.
MMD also filed a motion to dismiss arguing, among other things, that Plaintiffs failed to bid on a district contract so any claim of harm by the program was speculative.
On May 28, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the court should rule in their favor based on facts showing the program was discriminatory and violated the Equal Protection Clause. The court denied this request. On November 29, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a second motion for summary judgment, and on November 29 and 30, 2024, Defendants filed their own motions for summary judgment, claiming Plaintiffs lacked standing because they did not bid on a contract and were not harmed and that the facts did not support claims that the program was discriminatory or unconstitutional.
In February 2025, the court denied all three outstanding motions for summary judgment and ruled that a trial will be held to establish facts and decide the outcome of the case.
Court
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas
Status
Filed September 19, 2023 | Ongoing
Topic
Government programs