NEWS
Congratulations to DP&S partners Dana Levy and Kirk Pittard on back-to-back wins in the Texas Supreme Court!
On May 6, 2022, Dana successfully reversed a court of appeals’ opinion that the plaintiff’s expert report failed to satisfy Chapter 74 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. In E.D. v. Tex. Health Care, P.L.L.C., No. 20-0657, — S.W.3d —, 2022 WL 1434658 (Tex. May 6, 2022), the Texas Supreme Court held that the expert report was sufficient, confirming that Chapter 74’s “‘fair summary’ benchmark is not an evidentiary standard.” You can read a Law360 article about Dana’s case here.
The following week, Kirk Pittard successfully reversed a court of appeals’ opinion dismissing an appeal on jurisdiction grounds. In Mitschke v. Borromeo, No. 21-0326, — S.W.3d —, 2022 WL 1510317 (Tex. May 13, 2022), the Texas Supreme Court overruled Philbrook v. Berry, 683 S.W.2d 378 (Tex. 1985), and clarified that (1) a motion for new trial filed in the original cause is sufficient to extend the appellate deadlines in a severed, final judgment, and (2) the application of stare decisis generally and in cases transferred from one court of appeals to another. You can read a Law360 article about Kirk’s case here.
Congratulations to DP&S partner, Kirk Pittard, who, for the 11th year, was named “Best Lawyer” in the Appellate category by D Magazine for 2022.
Congratulations to DP&S partner, Thad Spalding, who successfully defeated a police officer’s qualified immunity appeal to the Fifth Circuit. The case involves the fatal shooting of a teenager, Jordan Edwards, by Balch Springs police officer Roy Oliver. Oliver moved for summary judgment, claiming his shooting–into a car full of teenagers who were leaving a party and driving away–was justified based on his belief that the vehicle was an immediate threat to his partner, Officer Gross. Officer Gross, however, testified that the vehicle was not a threat to him and the officers’ body cam video shows the vehicle passing and driving away from the officers at the time Oliver opened fire into the vehicle. The district court denied Oliver’s motion for summary judgment and Oliver appealed that ruling. The Fifth Circuit rejected Oliver’s appeal, allowing the claims against Oliver to proceed to trial. You can read the opinion here. You can also read a Dallas Morning News article about the case and the ruling here.
DP&S is proud to announce that Santa Fe-based partners Caren Friedman and Justin Kaufman have been named Southwest (New Mexico and Arizona) “Super Lawyers” for 2022, an honor based on professional achievement and peer recognition.
Caren was named in the Appellate practice category. She is one of only eight New Mexico appellate practitioners, and the only one from Santa Fe, to be recognized. This is Caren’s 16th consecutive year to be included on this list.
Justin was named in the Plaintiff’s Product Liability category. This is Justin’s 6th year to be named to the list, and he is the only New Mexico attorney listed in the category.
Last week, Kirk Pittard appeared on D. Todd Smith and Jody Sanders‘s Texas Appellate Law podcast to discuss serving as the appellate counsel on the trial team, and was invited to speak on this topic by the Dallas Bar Association’s Appellate Law Section. You can listen to Kirk’s podcast here.
DP&S is pleased to announce that our Santa Fe partner, Rosalind B. Bienvenu, has taken the helm of the New Mexico State Bar Appellate Practice Section. Roz will serve as the President of the Board of Directors for a one-year term in 2022. She will bring to the Section her exceptional skills as an appellate practitioner, and we wish her well!
DP&S is pleased to announce that, beginning January 3, 2022, Shelby White joined the firm’s Dallas office. Shelby brings a wealth of appellate experience to the firm, having spent three years with the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Appellate Section where she served as lead attorney in over 50 appeals. Before that, Shelby was with the appellate and litigation section of Harris, Finley & Bogle, PC in Fort Worth where she worked on commercial cases at the state and federal level in Texas, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania, and briefed appeals to the Texas Supreme Court, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and numerous intermediate appellate courts. Shelby is a graduate of Baylor undergraduate and law schools, a past board member of the Tarrant County Young Lawyers Association, a past president of the Tarrant County Bar Association’s Appellate Section, where she still serves on the section committee, and a top attorney according to Fort Worth Magazine since 2015. Shelby will be an excellent addition to our team.
Congratulations to Cynthia Huerta, David Glenn, Reed Morgan, Jake Glenn, and Kirk Pittard for getting a $1,265,000 jury verdict in Johnson County on November 23, 2021. They represented a plaintiff who had worked for BNSF railroad for 37 years until he injured his knee and back while on the job.
DP&S is proud to announce that it has been named to the “Best Lawyers” 2022 “Best Law Firms” list as a “Tier 1” firm–the highest ranking available–in the Dallas/Fort Worth area in Appellate Practice! According to U.S. News–Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms,” “[a]chieving a tiered ranking . . . signals a unique combination of quality law practice and breadth of legal expertise. Ranked firms, presented in three tiers, are recognized on a national and regional-based scale. Firms that received a tier designation reflect the highest level of respect a firm can earn among other leading lawyers and clients from the same communities and practice areas.” You can view all of the selected firms–including ours–and the method of selection, here.
Congratulations to DP&S Santa Fe partner, Caren Friedman, who, along with trial counsel Kristina Martinez, successfully convinced the New Mexico Court of Appeals to reverse the final decree in a domestic relations case. Representing the Mother in this custody dispute, DP&S argued that the district court violated the Rules of Civil Procedure by failing to conduct a hearing on her objections to a domestic relations hearing officer’s recommendations. In a formal published Opinion, the Court of Appeals stated that “Mother’s interpretation [of the rule] is the most plausible expression of the drafter’s intent, and we adopt it here.” The Court observed that while hearing officers may assist the district court in determining factual and legal issues, “the core judicial function must always be performed by the judge.” Because the district court did not address the merits of Mother’s objections, the Court concluded that the hearing was “insufficient to satisfy the requirements” of the rule. The Court of Appeals remanded the case with instructions for the district court to conduct a hearing on the merits of Mother’s objections. You can read the opinion in Rawlings v. Rawlings here.