The following published opinion was released by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on June 18, 2008:

• Mendoza v. Murphy (Jones, C.J., Barksdale, Stewart, JJ.; opinion by Jones, C.J.). The Mendozas filed suit in federal court against the United States stemming from treatment of Mr. Mendoza’s bladder cancer in the El Paso V.A. hospital; subsequently, the Mendozas successfully moved the court to exercise its supplemental jurisdiction and allow amendment of their complaint to add defendant doctors against whom purely state law claims were being alleged. The Mendozas also filed suit in Texas state court against the doctors. The Mendozas subsequently settled their claims against the United States, then moved the federal court to decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims against the doctors. The federal court denied that motion, then entered summary judgment dismissing the claims as time-barred under the applicable Texas statute of limitations. The Fifth Circuit affirmed, holding that the initial exercise of supplemental jurisdiction was correct; that the district court did not abuse its discretion in retaining supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims because the state law issue was not complex and was ripe for summary treatment; and that the district court’s ruling that the Texas “open courts doctrine” did not toll the limitations period was correct because the Mendozas had reasonable opportunity to discover their cause of action within the two-year limitations period.

The Fifth Circuit also released an amended opinion in Stroman Realty, Inc. v. Antt, originally released on May 14, 2008.