ACCEPTED 15-25-00131-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 12/1/2025 12:19 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE No. 15-25-000131-CV CLERK FILED IN Fifteenth Court Of Appeals 15th COURT OF APPEALS Austin, Texas AUSTIN, TEXAS 12/1/2025 12:19:59 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk Laura McClelland, Appellant v. Michael Morath, Commissioner of Education, and Weatherford Independent School District Appellees

REPLY BRIEF OF APPELLANT LAURA McCLELLAND ON APPEAL FROM THE 98TH DISTRICT COURT, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS TRIAL COURT CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-25-000504 _____________________________________________________________ BRIM & BRIM, P.C.

Richard Arnett, Of Counsel State Bar No. 01333300 5926 Balcones Drive, Suite 220 Austin, Texas 78731 Telephone: (512) 328-0048 Facsimile: (512) 328-4814 Email: [email protected] Attorney for Laura McClelland Identity of Parties and Counsel

Appellant: Appellant’s Counsel: Laura McClelland BRIM & BRIM, P.C.

Richard Arnett, Of Counsel State Bar No. 01333300 5926 Balcones Drive, Suite 220 Austin, Texas 78731 Telephone: (512) 328-0048 Facsimile: (512) 328-4814 Email: [email protected]

Appellees Appellees’ Counsel: Weatherford Independent Colby Rideout School District Leasor Crass, P.C.

302 W. Broad Street Mansfield, Texas Telephone: (682) 422-0009 Facsimile: (682) 422-0008 Email: [email protected] Michael Morath Keegan Howe, Assistant Attorney General Texas Commissioner of Education Office of the Attorney General P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Austin, Texas Telephone: (512) 475-4300 Facsimile: (512) 320-0157 Email: [email protected]

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Identities of Parties and Counsel……………………………………….…….. ii Table of Contents………………………………………………………….…. iii Index of Authorities………………………………………………………….. iv Introduction………...………………………………………………………….1 Section 22.003(b) …………………. ……………………………………….. 1 Mootness……………. ……………………………………………………… 1 Prayer for Relief………………………………….………………………..... 3 Certificate of Service ……………………………………………………….. 4 Certificate of Compliance ………………………………………………….. 4

iii INDEX OF AUTHORITIES Cases Page Click v. Tyra, 867 S.W.2d 406 (Ct. App. Tex. 14th Dist. 1993, no writ) ……………………………... 3 Hudspeth v. Chapel Hill I.S.D., No. 03-06-00243-CV, 2007 WL 1647818, at *2 (Tex. App.—Austin June 8, 2007, no pet.) … 2 Myrtle Springs Re.d Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Hogan, 705 S.W.2d 707, 709 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 1985, writ ref'd n.r.e.). ……………………….. 2

Nehls v. Hartman Newspapers, LP, 522 S.W.3d 23, 33 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, pet. denied) ………………… 3 Perry v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist., 902 S.W.2d 544, 547 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1995, writ. dism'd w.o.j.) ……………. 2

Constitutional Provisions, Statutes & Regulations Texas Education Code, Section 7.057 (a)(2)(A) …………………………. 1 Texas Education Code, Section 22.003 ……………………………….. passim Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code, Section 37.004……..…….… 2

iv INTRODUCTION Appellees largely ignore the controlling authorities relied upon by Ms. McClelland and offer little that necessitates a reply. However, there are some points that warrant a brief response.

SECTION 22.003(b) Appellees still fail to address the actual words of the statute, continuing to attempt to wish away the word “other.” The Commissioner dwells on the use of the term “personal leave” in Section 22.003(a), Brief at p. 25, but then asks the Court to substitute “personal” for “other” in Subsection (b), which is contrary to every known rule of statutory construction. Similarly, he argues that “all” only encompasses that which follows but then substitutes “personal” for “other” in order to administratively amend the law and reach the result desired.

MOOTNESS Appellees provide no explanation for why Ms. McClelland’s challenge to the legality of WISD’s policies does not remain a live controversy within the controlling authorities. E.g. Brief of Commissioner, p. 9-10. Section 7.057(a)(2)(A) of the Texas Education Code provides jurisdiction to the Commissioner over appeals of “actions or decisions of any school district board of trustees that violate: (A) the school laws of this state .…” The Board of Trustees decision to uphold and apply its Board

Policy DEC violated Section 22.003(b) and the controversy remains alive as long as Ms. McClelland’s contractual relationship with WISD is governed by this illegal provision.

The operational policies adopted by a school board before making an employment contract with a teacher form part of the contract and the teacher's employment is subject to those policies. Perry v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist., 902 S.W.2d 544, 547 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1995, writ. dism'd w.o.j.); Myrtle Springs Reverted Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Hogan, 705 S.W.2d 707, 709 (Tex.App.- Texarkana 1985, writ ref'd n.r.e.).

Hudspeth v. Chapel Hill I.S.D., No. 03-06-00243-CV, 2007 WL 1647818, at *2 (Tex. App.—Austin June 8, 2007, no pet.).

In what appears a transparent attempt to mislead, Appellees continue to mischaracterize Ms. McClelland’s argument regarding the Declaratory Judgment Act. Obviously, the Commissioner of Education does not have jurisdiction over lawsuits filed under the UDJA. The point is that Ms. McClelland’s challenge to the legality of WISD’s contractual policies cannot be considered moot in order to deprive the Commissioner and courts of jurisdiction for want of a case or controversy when such challenges are not so considered when brought as a “question of construction or validity” by any other litigant under the UDJA, even before a breach.

Section 37.004, Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code.

Additionally, the case the Commissioner relies upon for refutation of Click v. Tyra, 867 S.W.2d 406 (Ct. App. Tex. 14th Dist. 1993, no writ) actually refutes his position. The case before this Court involves a written, official policy of WISD that forms a part of its contractual relationship with Ms. McClelland and violates state law. The Court in Nehls v. Hartman Newspapers, LP, 522 S.W.3d 23, 33 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, pet. denied), did not question that such cases are governed by the rule in Click, stating: Unlike the relators in Click, Hartman has offered no evidence or support for the notion that appellants have a policy or practice of routinely withholding discoverable public information such that it is a “recurring problem.”

PRAYER FOR RELIEF Appellant prays that the decision of the Commissioner be reversed, and the Court invalidate school district policies requiring exhaustion of Temporary Disability Leave and Family and Medical Leave Act leave while employees are on assault leave.

Respectfully submitted,

s/ Richard Arnett Richard L. Arnett Texas Bar No. 01333300 [email protected] Telephone: (720) 366-7774 Of Counsel to Brim & Brim, P.C.

5926 Balcones Drive, Suite 220 Austin, Texas 78731 Telephone: (512) 328-0048

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on November 26, 2025, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon Mr. Colby Rideout attorney for the Weatherford Independent School District, by email at [email protected], and Mr. Keegan Howe, Assistant Attorney General, by email at [email protected]. /s/ Richard Arnett Richard L. Arnett

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE I certify that the brief submitted complies with Rule 9.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure because it has been prepared in a conventional typeface no smaller than 14-point for text, except for footnotes, which are no smaller than 12- point, and the word count of this document is 575. The word processing software used to prepare this brief and calculate the word count of the document is Microsoft Word.

Dated: November 26, 2025 /s/ Richard L. Arnett Richard L. Arnett

Automated Certificate of eService This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system.

The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.

Melody Montemayor on behalf of Richard Arnett Bar No. 1333300 [email protected] Envelope ID: 108557301 Filing Code Description: Other Brief Filing Description: Appellant's Reply Brief Status as of 12/1/2025 12:48 PM CST Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Jeff Lutz [email protected] 12/1/2025 12:19:59 PM SENT Melody Montemayor [email protected] 12/1/2025 12:19:59 PM SENT Jefferson K.Brim, III [email protected] 12/1/2025 12:19:59 PM SENT Richard Arnett [email protected] 12/1/2025 12:19:59 PM SENT Colby Rideout [email protected] 12/1/2025 12:19:59 PM SENT Mike Leasor [email protected] 12/1/2025 12:19:59 PM SENT Laura McClelland [email protected] 12/1/2025 12:19:59 PM SENT Keegan Howe [email protected] 12/1/2025 12:19:59 PM SENT Mike Morath [email protected] 12/1/2025 12:19:59 PM SENT Victoria Russell [email protected] 12/1/2025 12:19:59 PM SENT