The Texas Supreme Court issued four opinions last week:

• In the zoning case of City of Dallas v. Vanesko, the Court addressed whether "a city can enforce a zoning ordinance against a property owner whose substantially completed new home has been built in violation of the ordinance, even though the city had given preliminary approval to the owner’s building plans." In an opinion written by Justice Green, the Court ruled that it can. Justice O' Neill wrote this dissenting opinion.
  
• In City of Houston v. Jackson, the Court addressed Chapter 143 of the Local Government Code, which deals with grievances filed by police officers and fire fighters. Justice O'Neill wrote an opinion dismissing the case for lack of jurisdiction.
  
• In Minnesota Life Insur. Co. v. Vasquez, the Court addressed extra-contractual damages in an insurance breach-of-policy case. Justice Brister wrote this opinion holding that claims for extra-contractual damages should not be a routine addition to every breach-of-policy case. Instead, "such damages are reserved for cases in which an insurer knew its actions were false, deceptive, or unfair."
  
• In In re Karen Mays-Hooper, the Court issued this per curiam opinion involving grandparent visitation rights. The grandparents in this suit faced the same fate as the grandparents in a similar suit that the United States Supreme Court decided almost five years ago. As the Texas Supreme Court wrote, "[i]n Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000), the Supreme Court of the United States held unconstitutional a Washington trial court’s order granting a boy’s grandparents visitation rights over the objection of his mother. Because the trial court’s order here is indistinguishable, it must meet the same fate."