law-fundamental-error exception to error-preservation requirement  


In their reply brief, the Langstons assert that, if this court concludes error was not preserved, then this court
should review the issue under the doctrine of fundamental error.  The Supreme Court of Texas, however, has
concluded that, in the context of civil appeals, fundamental error is a narrow doctrine.  See In re B.L.D., 113
S.W.3d 340, 350
-52 (Tex. 2003).  The alleged constitutional violation that the Langstons assert in their
third issue does not fall within the narrow scope of the fundamental error doctrine recognized by the
Supreme Court of Texas.  See id.  Therefore, fundamental error does not apply to the Langstons'
constitutional complaint.  See id.   Because the Langstons failed to preserve error, we overrule their
third issue.  
Langston v. City of Houston (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 6, 2009)  (Frost)   
bill of review denied, tax suit, failure to avail oneself of available remedies, i.e. direct appeal precludes
bill-of-review relief, claim of fundamental error rejected)
AFFIRMED: Opinion by Justice Frost  
Before Justices Frost, Seymore and Boyce   
14-08-00063-CV   C. Dale Langston and Sue Langston v. City of Houston, Harris County, Pasadena
Independent School District and San Jacinto Community College   
Appeal from 55th District Court of Harris County