§ 107.002.Effect of Grant of Permission

The heart of the chapter, and the twelve conditions describe how little permission gives.

The claimant may sue for any relief to which the claimant is entitled as a result of the described claim — so the resolution opens the courthouse for the claim it names.

The suit must be filed before the second anniversary of the resolution’s effective date. Two years, and the permission lapses.

Service must be made on the attorney general and on a person named in the resolution as a representative of the affected agency, and the suit must be tried as other civil suits.

Then the conditions that matter most, and they are all restrictive.

Neither the state nor its employees, agents, departments, agencies or subdivisions admits liability or the truth of any allegation.

The alleged cause of action must be proved under the law of this state as in other civil suits. Permission is not an advantage on the merits.

The state does not waive any defense, of law or fact, and reserves every defense except the defense of immunity from suit without legislative permission.

Read those two together and the scope of the grant is plain. One defence is given up — immunity from suit — and every other survives, including immunity from liability, which subsection (b) confirms is not waived to any extent.

So a claimant with permission may find the suit dismissed on immunity from liability, having obtained a private act of the Legislature to get that far.

Three further conditions close the list. Res judicata is unaffected; no permission is granted to recover exemplary or punitive damages; and Eleventh Amendment immunity is not waived and no permission is granted to be sued in any federal court.