Kirk L. Pittard, Partner

= read publication

Publications & Presentations

What to Make of Proving and Challenging Non-Economic Damage Recoveries After Gregory v. Chohan

co-author(s): and Elizabeth “Heidi” Block

State Bar of Texas – Appellate Section Lunch & Learn CLE, December 13, 2024

What you need to know from Gregory v. Chohan

South Plains Trial Lawyers Association Lunch, Lubbock Texas, October 16, 2024

What to Make of Proving and Challenging Noneconomic Damage Recoveries after Gregory v. Chohan

co-author(s): and Elizabeth “Heidi” Block

Advanced Civil Appellate Practice course, Austin, Texas, September 6, 2024

Legal Issues Related to Non-Economic Damages: Gregory v. Chohan

San Antonio Trial Lawyers Association Membership Lunch, San Antonio Texas, April 18, 2024

Effective Use of Appellate Counsel on Your Trial Team

2024 Advance Civil Trial Seminar, The Ultimate Trial Notebook from the Masters, Corpus Christi Bar Association, Corpus Christi Texas, April 12, 2024

Ethical Issues in Contracting Appellate Counsel

co-author(s): and Brandy Wingate Voss

Appellate Practice Outreach, Appellate Section of State Bar of Texas, Texas Tech University School of Law, Lubbock Texas, April 11, 2024

Legal Issues Related to Non-Economic Damages: Gregory v. Chohan

TTLA 2023 Annual Meeting CLE, Austin Texas, November 3, 2023

Constitutional Issues and Implications of Gregory v. Chohan

co-author(s): with Elizabeth M. Fraley, James E. Wren and R. Jack Ayres, Jr.

Virtual Roundtable Discussion, Baylor Law School, October 11, 2023

Trial Masters LIVE!

Texas Trial Lawyers Association 2023 Midyear Conference & CLE Seminar, Houston, Texas, June 7-9, 2023

Building a Winning Combination: The Benefits of an Appellate Lawyer on Your Trial Team

co-author(s): with Honorable Dori Contreras and Brian C. Miller

State Bar of Texas 18th Annual Course Soaking Up Some CLE, South Padre Island, Texas, May 11-12, 2023

Tips and Tools for Serving as the Appellate Attorney on Your Trial Team

co-author(s): with Hon. Dori Contreras and Brian C. Miller

State Bar of Texas 18th Annual Course Soaking Up Some CLE, South Padre Island, Texas, May 11-12, 2023

Jury Charge Issues: Willful and Wanton Negligence, Mental Anguish, and More

co-author(s): Honorable Kyle Carter, Chastiti Horne

State Bar of Texas 29th Annual Advance Medical Torts, San Antonio, Texas, March 23-24, 2023

Liability for Emergency Medical Care Under the Revised Statue

State Bar of Texas 29th Annual Advance Medical Torts, San Antonio, Texas, March 23-24, 2023

Getting Back to Trial: Preparing for Appeal Throughout Litigation

Texas Trial Lawyers Association 2022 Mid-Year Conference & CLE, June 1-3, 2022

Welcome to the Jungle: Proving up medical bills after In re Allstate & In re K&L Auto Crushers

co-author(s): with Morgan McPheeters

Dallas Trial Lawyers Association, May 18, 2022

Can’t We All Just Be Reasonable When it Comes to 18.001?

co-author(s): with Hon. Daryl Moore and Kevin Yankowsky

State Bar of Texas, Advanced Trial Strategies, New Orleans, Louisiana, March 3-4, 2022

Serving as Appellate Counsel on a Trial Team

co-author(s): with D. Todd Smith and Jody Sanders

Texas Appellate Law Podcast (February 17, 2022)

Tips and Tools for Serving as the Appellate Attorney on Your Trial Team

Dallas Bar Association Appellate Law Section (February 17, 2022)

Tips and Tools for Serving as the Appellate Attorney on Your Trial Team

co-author(s): and the Honorable Dustin M. Howell

Advanced Civil Appellate Practice, State Bar of Texas, Austin, Texas (December 3, 2021)

Observations From an Appellate Attorney at Trial

2021 Advanced Tactics and Strategies, Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Santa Fe, New Mexico (September 10, 2021)

Liability for Emergency Medical Care Under the Revised Statute

27th Annual Advanced Medical Torts, State Bar of Texas (March 25-26, 2021)

Elections Have Consequences: The New Landscape in the Texas Courts of Appeals

co-author(s): and Kent Rutter

Tarrant County Trial Lawyers Association, Fort Worth, Texas, February 26, 2020

7 Reason We Need Appellate Counsel at Trial: Preservation of Error and Other Good Stuff

Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Fort Worth, Texas, November 7, 2019

Recovery of Medical Expenses Under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 41.0105 – The Paid or Incurred Statute

51 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 731 (Summer 2019)

Observations from an Appellate Attorney at Trial: Preservation of Error and Other Good Stuff

Houston Trial Lawyers Association, Houston, Texas (August 2018);
San Antonio Trial Lawyers Association, San Antonio, Texas (June 2018);
Tarrant County Trial Lawyers Association, Fort Worth, Texas (February 2018)

Submission of Pain and Suffering and Mental Anguish in the Jury Charge

The Advocate (State Bar Litigation Section Report-Vol. 77, Winter 2016)

The Review of New Trial Orders on Appeal

Vol. 40, No. 5, Dallas Bar Association: Headnotes (May 2015)

Recovery of Medical Expenses

State Bar of Texas CLE, 22nd Annual Advanced Medical Torts Course, San Antonio (March 12-13, 2015)

Recovering Medical Expenses in Personal Injury Cases

co-author(s): with Michael Yanof and Cassie Dallas

State Bar of Texas CLE, Damages in Civil Litigation 2014 (February 6-7, 2014)

Panel Discussion Regarding the Jury Charge and Charge Conference

co-author(s): with Judge Tonya Parker and Jody Rudman

Dallas Bar Association Trial Academy, Dallas, Texas (July 26, 2013)

Preservation of Error for Appeal

co-author(s): with Judge Mark Greenberg, Steve Gibson and Scott Stolley

Dallas Bar Association Tort & Insurance Practice Section, Dallas, Texas (July 9, 2013)

Chapter 74 Pleadings and Motions…Not as Simple as You Might Think

co-author(s): Jennifer King

State Bar of Texas, 20th Annual Advanced Medical Torts, San Antonio, Texas (March 14, 2013)

Escabedo Decision: Navigating the Recovery of Medical Damages in a Personal Injury Case

University of Texas School of Law, Insurance Law Institute, Austin, Texas (October 18, 2012)

Escabedo Decision: Navigating the Recovery of Medical Damages in a Personal Injury Case

Fort Bend County Bar Association, Sugarland, Texas (August, 30, 2012)

Escabedo Decision: Navigating the Recovery of Medical Damages in a Personal Injury Lawsuit

Soaking Up Some CLE, State Bar of Texas CLE (May 17-18, 2012)

Trends in Rulings by the Texas Courts of Appeals

Dallas Bar Association, Appellate Section (May 17, 2012)

Escabedo Decision: Navigating the Recovery of Medical Damages in a Personal Injury Case

Denton County Bench Bar Conference, Pottsboro, Texas (May 01, 2012)

Escabedo Decision: Navigating the Recovery of Medical Damages in a Personal Injury Lawsuit

Advanced Evidence and Discovery, State Bar of Texas CLE (April 26-27, 2012)

The Long, Long Road of Paid or Incurred

co-author(s): , Dan Worthington, and Milton C. Colia

Texas Association of Defense Counsel, Inc., 2012 Spring Meeting, Santa Fe, New Mexico (April 25, 2012)

Paid or Incurred after Escabedo

Permian Basin Trial Lawyers Association, Odessa, Texas (03/15/12)

Guest commentator, KTSA 550AM, regarding the Texas Supreme Court’s opinion in Haygood v. Escabedo concerning recovery of past medical expenses in civil cases

Justice for All – The Wyatt Wright Show (January 22, 2012)

Paid or Incurred after Escabedo

San Antonio Trial Lawyers Association, San Antonio, Texas (12/15/11)

What Every Young Lawyer Needs to Know About…Mandamus Practice

Dallas Association of Young Lawyers, Dallas, Texas (December 14, 2011)

Paid or Incurred After Escabedo

co-author(s): and Andy Payne

Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Advanced Personal Injury Seminar, Houston, Texas (December 1, 2011)

Legal Symposium for the Dallas Judiciary Regarding Paid or Incurred after Escabedo

co-author(s): with Andy Payne, Dan Worthington and Ken Riney

Dallas, Texas (October 13, 2011)

Escabedo/Paid vs Incurred

Road Rules Dallas: A Crash Course Car Wrecks Seminar, Dallas, Texas (October 6, 2011)

Legislative Update and the Escabedo Case

co-author(s): with Paula Sweeney, Tex Quesada, Brian Lauten, Dick Sayles, Mary Margaret Black and William Toles

Dallas Bar Association, Tort & Insurance Practice Section, Dallas, Texas (October 4, 2011)

Paid or Incurred after Escabedo

East Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Longview, Texas (September 21, 2011)

The Economics of Appeals: Fee Arrangements (including Alternative Arrangements) for Appellate Counsel

co-author(s): with Jeff Levinger, Oscar Rey Rodriguez, John Torres

State Bar of Texas, Appellate Section, Dallas, Texas (June 17, 2011)

Limitations and Repose: Molinet, Rankin, Walters & Offenbach

Texas Trial Lawyers Association Annual Meeting, Medical Malpractice Seminar, Austin, Texas (June 2, 2011)

Liability for Health Care Providers Under the Emergency Medical Care Statute

State Bar of Texas, Santa Fe, New Mexico (March 17, 2011)

How Appellate Counsel Can Add Value to Your Case Throughout Litigation

Mississippi Association for Justice, New Orleans (June 11, 2010)

Paid or Incurred: What’s Happened, and What’s on the Horizon

El Paso Trial Lawyers Association, El Paso, Texas (March 18, 2010)

Liability for Health Care Providers Under the Emergency Medical Care Statute

State Bar of Texas, Santa Fe, New Mexico (March 17, 2010)

What Every Young Lawyer Should Know About Legal Writing

co-author(s): with Justice Mary Murphy and Talmage Boston

Dallas Association of Young Lawyers (March 10, 2010)

The Rogue Ice Cube: What Texas Supreme Court Legal Sufficiency Review Means for Your Practice

Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Las Vegas, Nevada (February 26, 2010)

FAA Airman Enforcement Actions 101

RFC Dallas Flying Club, Addison, Texas (April 21, 2009)

The Fallibility of Eyewitness Testimony and the Texas Innocence Project

co-author(s): , et. al.

Patrick E. Higginbotham American Inn of Court, Dallas, Texas (April 15, 2009)

Appellate Tips for Trial Attorneys

Vol. 33, No. 4 Dallas Bar Association: Headnotes (April 1, 2009)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

East Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Jefferson, Texas (March 26, 2009)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

The University of Texas School of Law, 2008 The Car Crash Seminar, Austin, Texas (August 15, 2008)

How Appellate Counsel Can Add Value to Your Case Throughout Litigation

Houston TTLA Advocates (May 28, 2008)

Removal and Remand

Texas Association of Legal Professional 53rd Annual Board Meeting and Education Conference (May 3, 2008)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Car Wrecks Seminar, 2007 Annual Conference, Austin Texas (November 29, 2007)

Legal and Factual Sufficiency Review After City of Keller

co-author(s): and O. Rey Rodriguez

Dallas Bar Association, Appellate Law Section (October 18, 2007)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

San Antonio Trial Lawyers Association, San Antonio, Texas (October 18, 2007)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

Tarrant County Trial Lawyers Association, Ft. Worth, Texas (October 10, 2007)

Removal and Remand

co-author(s): & Joshua Bernstein

Texas Advanced Paralegal Seminar, Dallas, Texas (October 4, 2007)

The Meaning and Application of HB 4’s “Paid or Incurred”

co-author(s): and Mike Huddleston

Dallas Bar Association, Torts and Insurance Practice Litigation Section (September 27, 2007)

Airmen Enforcement Actions 101 for Trial Attorneys.

American Association for Justice, Section Connection-Aviation Law, Vol. 15, No. 1 (Fall 2007)

How Appellate Counsel Can Add Value to Your Case Throughout Litigation

American Association for Justice 2007 Annual Convention (July 18, 2007)

How Can Appellate Counsel Add Value to Your Case Throughout Litigation?

American Association for Justice Annual Convention (June 29, 2007)

How Appellate Counsel Can Add Value to Your Case Throughout Litigation

El Paso County Trial Lawyers Association (June 28, 2007)

Removal and Remand

Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Advanced Personal Injury Seminar, Austin, Texas (May 31, 2007)

How Appellate Counsel Can Add Value to Your Case Throughout Litigation

Collin County Bench Bar Conference (April 20, 2007)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

Collin County Bench Bar Conference (April 20, 2007)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

Dallas Trial Lawyers Association and the Dallas Women Lawyers Association (January 25, 2007)

Dead or Alive: The Collateral Source Rule After HB4.

Vol. 37 The Advocate, Texas State Bar litigation Section (Winter 2006)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

Texas Trial Lawyers Association Car Wrecks Seminar (November 30, 2006)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

Tarrant County Trial Lawyers Association (October 25, 2006)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

co-author(s): and Andrew L. Payne

Mesquite Bar Association (October 18, 2006)

Removal and Remand

Dallas Area Paralegal Association (October 3, 2006)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

co-author(s): and Andrew L. Payne

South Plains Trial Lawyers Association (September 20, 2006)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

co-author(s): and Andrew L. Payne

Capital Area Trial Lawyers Association (July 11, 2006)

Removal and Remand

co-author(s): & James E. Girards

Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Advanced Personal Injury Seminar, Houston, Texas (May 11-12, 2006)

Paid or Incurred: Recovery of Medical Expenses

co-author(s): and Andrew L. Payne

Dallas Trial Lawyers Association (March 16, 2006)

The Benefits of Retaining Appellate Counsel Throughout Litigation

Denton Trial Lawyers Association (February 16, 2006)

Preliminary Discovery: Plaintiffs’ Perspective

co-author(s): & Keith Patton

Harris Martin Benzene 101 Litigation Conference, San Antonio, Texas (February 2-3, 2006)

The Benefits of Retaining Appellate Counsel Throughout Litigation

co-author(s): and William Richard Thompson

Dallas Bar Associationâ Trial Skills Section (December 9, 2005)

The Benefits of Retaining Appellate Counsel Throughout Litigation

San Antonio Trial Lawyers Association (November 17, 2005)

The Benefits of Retaining Appellate Counsel Throughout Litigation

co-author(s): and William Richard Thompson

Dallas Bar Associationâ Friday Clinic (September 2, 2005)

The Benefits of Retaining Appellate Counsel Throughout Litigation

co-author(s): and William Richard Thompson

Capital Area Trial Lawyers Association (May 10, 2005)

The Benefits of Retaining Appellate Counsel Throughout Litigation

co-author(s): and William Richard Thompson

Tarrant County Trial Lawyers Association (April 27, 2005)

The Benefits of Retaining Appellate Counsel Throughout Litigation

co-author(s): and William Richard Thompson

Solo & Small Firm Section of the Dallas Bar Association (April 6, 2005)

What Good Is Appellate Counsel?

Vol. 1, Issue 4, Dallas Trial Lawyers Association: The Front Line (March 1, 2005)

The Benefits of Retaining Appellate Counsel Throughout Litigation

co-author(s): and The Honorable Deborah Hankinson

Texas Trial Lawyers Association Annual Meeting (November 17, 2004)

Lawyer Referral Fees and Advertising: A Final Report From the State Bar

Vol. 28, No. 7 Dallas Bar Association Headnotes (July 1, 2004)

A View from the Bench-Differences Between State and Federal Court Practice

Vol. 28, No. 2 Dallas Bar Association: Headnotes (February 1, 2004)

Multidistrict Litigation: Texas Style

Vol. 28, No. 2 Dallas Bar Association: Headnotes (February 1, 2004)

Homeland Security: Plan Ahead Before Heading to Court

Vol. 27, No. 7 Dallas Bar Association: Headnotes (July 1, 2003)

Enforcement Procedures For the State Board For Education Certification and the Texas Educators’ Code of Ethics

co-author(s): , Neal W. Adams and Jon McCormick

Vol. 17, No. 9, Texas School Administrators’ Legal Digest (October 1, 2001)

Withstanding Batson Muster: What Constitutes a Neutral Explanation

50 Baylor L. Rev. 985 (Fall 1998)

= read opinion

Significant Cases

Mitschke v. Borromeo, 645 S.W.3d 251 (Tex. 2022)

Overruling Philbrook v. Berry, 683 S.W.2d 378 (Tex. 1985), and clarifying that a motion for new trial filed in the original cause is nonetheless sufficient to extend the appellate deadlines in a  severed, final judgment, and clarifying the application of stare decisis generally and in cases transferred from one court of appeals to another.

$1,265,000 FELA jury verdict in Johnson County against BNSF Railroad

Congratulations to Cynthia Huerta, David Glenn, Reed Morgan, Jake Glenn, and Kirk Pittard for their $1,265,000 jury verdict in Johnson County late 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.

$19 million settlement in double-fatality trucking case

Congratulations to DP&S lawyers Kirk Pittard and Tammy Holt who were part of a trial team lead by Steve Laird, Robert Collins, Seth McCloskey, and Bracken Millar, that recently settled a double-fatality trucking case for $19 Million (for non-economic damages only) the day before the case was set to go to trial in Tarrant County.

Murphy v. Arcos, 615 S.W.3d 676 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2020, pet. denied)

On motion for rehearing en banc, successfully convinced panel to reverse itself and award Plaintiffs the total damages ($1,070,050) awarded by jury, rather than a drastically reduced amount ($200,000) based on the amount originally pled.  The court of appeals rejected its original position that the Plaintiffs’ attempt to amend its petition to be consistent with the jury’s verdict was an impermissible attempt to amend the pleadings “post-judgment.”  A matter of first impression, the court of appeals adopted “the more reasonable view” that, because Plaintiffs sought leave to amend their petition before the Amended Final Judgment was signed, the amended pleading was timely.

In re State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 614 S.W.3d 316 (Tex. App.- Fort Worth 2020, orig. proceeding)

Denial of State Farm’s mandamus petition seeking to avoid discovery in the uninsured/underinsured motorist context.  In doing so, the court of appeals discusses at length the distinction between a breach of contract claim against the UM/UIM insurer and common law or statutory claims for breach of duties of good faith and fair dealing.  Noting a distinction based on the historical development of the claims and their accrual, the court of appeals found that Brainard does not foreclose such claims.  Rather, another line of cases, beginning with the Texas Supreme Court’s opinion in Arnold (and modified later by Murray), which hold that the insurer’s duties of good faith and fair dealing can accrue prior to a judgment that would trigger the insurer’s contractual liability, controls and allows such claims, and supported the trial court’s order compelling discovery related to the insurer’s claims-handling practices.

Gonzales Nursing Operations, LLC v. Smith, No. 04-20-00102-CV, 2020 WL 5646482 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 23, 2020, pet. denied) (mem. op).

Successfully dismissed interlocutory appeal for lack of jurisdiction by independent contractor who contracted with a government entity to manage a nursing home. Claiming derivative sovereign immunity, the contractor sought to appeal the trial court’s denial of its plea to the jurisdiction. Without reaching the substance of the derivative sovereign immunity claim, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal, holding that contracting with a government entity did not transform the contractor into a “governmental entity” entitled to appeal under the interlocutory appeal statute.

Shiloh Treatment Center, Inc. v. Ward, 608 S.W.3d 337 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2020, pet. denied)

Affirming denial of second Chapter 74 motion to dismiss filed by operators of facilities for young people with mental disabilities filed after unsuccessful appeal of the first Chapter 74 motion to dismiss, finding the law of the case doctrine barred second motion to dismiss based on the same facts.

In re Eagleridge Operating, LLC, No. 05-19-01171-CV, 2020 WL 408409 (Tex. App.—Dallas Jan. 24, 2020, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Denying mandamus relief, finding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in striking responsible third party designation by owner of gas facility of former minority-interest owner and contract-operator.  The court of appeals held that the minority owner, who sold its interest in the premises to the majority owner prior to the personal injuries at issue, owed no duty to the injured plaintiff because, under premises-liability principles, any such duty passed to the majority owner when its interest was sold.

$12.5 million settlement in an 18-wheeler-motorcycle collision case in Rockwall County

After a two-week trial, DP&S partner, Kirk Pittard, along with a trial team that included Steve Laird, Seth McCloskey, Tim Brandenburg, and Pete Kestner, secured a $12.5 million settlement in an 18-wheeler-motorcycle collision case in Rockwall County.  The collision occurred when the plaintiff, who was alleged to be going 60 m.p.h. in a 40 m.p.h. zone and attempting to time the green light as he entered the intersection, hit a Mercer 18-wheeler that had run a red light.  The plaintiff, who survived the accident, is now blind and paralyzed.  It was an all-hands-on-deck effort that led to the settlement just before closing argument.

Morris v. Ponce, 584 S.W.3d 922 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2019, pet. filed)

In matter of first impression, affirming denial of Chapter 74 motions to dismiss filed by newly-added nurses, holding that for purposes of section 74.351(a), an action does not commence as to each defendant until it is first named as a defendant.

The Univ. of Tex. M.D. Anderson Cancer Ctr. v. McKenzie, 578 S.W.3d 506 (Tex. 2019)

Under the Texas Tort Claims Act, the State’s sovereign immunity is waived if a negligent decision is coupled with use of tangible personal property and the use proximately causes injury.  Because the Act does not require that the tangible personal property be used in a negligent manner in order to waive sovereign immunity, the Texas Supreme Court held that the hospital’s use of an improper solution during a chemotherapy procedure was sufficient to waive immunity.

Galindo v. Garner, No. 05-19-00061-CV, 2019 WL 2098689 (Tex. App.—Dallas May 14, 2019, no pet. h.) (mem. op.).

Successfully upheld an order denying a motion to transfer venue in a Texas Dram Shop Act case from Dallas County to Tarrant County on the basis that the plaintiffs had properly pleaded a cause of action against an employee of a bar who resided in Dallas County at the time of the incident. In an issue of first impression, the court of appeals unanimously held that the plain language of the Dram Shop Act provides a civil cause of action against not just the bar itself, but also an individual employee who overserves an intoxicated person.

Mancilla v. TaxFree Shopping, Ltd., No. 05-18-00136, 2018 WL 6850951 (Tex. App.—Dallas Nov. 16, 2018, no pet.) (mem. op.)

Successfully defending trial court’s denial of an untimely motion to dismiss pursuant to the Texas Citizens’ Participation Act (the anti-SLAPP statute), finding the 60-day deadline to file the motion was not reset by an amended pleading that “d[id] not alter the essential nature” of the trade secret claim, “of which appellants had notice in the original petition.”

Pettway v. Olvera, No. 14-17-00532-CV, 2018 WL 4016949 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 23, 2018, no pet. h.) (mem. op.)

Approving sufficiency of expert’s report under Chapter 74, rejecting attack on “believability” of expert’s preliminary report, and holding that a board-certified orthopedic surgeon is qualified to offer an opinion as to the standard of care required of an emergency physician prescribing crutches, even though surgeon was not an emergency physician.

McCain v. Promise House, Inc., No. 05-16-00714-CV, 2018 WL 2042009 (Tex. App.—Dallas May 2, 2018, no pet.) (mem. op.)

Successfully reversed summary judgment in favor of insured and insurer after defense counsel assigned by insurer agreed to settlement of claims but insured withdrew consent, where insurance policy was a non-consent policy which gave insurer unilateral right to settle case and insured no right to consent or, in this case, withdraw consent.

SCI Texas Funeral Servs., Inc. v. Nelson, 540 S.W.3d 539 (Tex. 2018)

Holding that a funeral home owes a common law duty to a deceased’s next of kin to not mishandle the deceased’s body and that such a duty need not be based on the existence of a contract.

In re East Texas Med. Ctr., 12-17-00183-CV, 2017 WL 4675511 (Tex. App.—Tyler Oct. 18, 2017, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Successfully defeating hospital’s mandamus petition challenging a trial court order taking judicial notice of administrative rules promulgated by the Texas Medical Board.

Smith v. Johnson, 05-16-01261-CV, 2017 WL 3275517 (Tex. App.—Dallas July 26, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.)

Successfully defended medical providers’ appeal, challenging the plaintiff’s Chapter 74 expert reports in a case in which the medical providers’ negligence resulted in the amputation of the plaintiff’s leg.

D.A. v. Texas Health Presbyterian Hosp. of Denton, 514 S.W.3d 431 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2017, pet. filed)

Reversed and rendered judgment following permissive appeal, holding that section 74.153 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which applies a lower “willful and wanton” standard of care to medical care provided in a hospital emergency room does not apply to medical care provided an expectant mother in an obstetrical unit.

In the Interest of H.S., a minor child, No. 02-15-00303-CV, 2016 WL 4040497 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth July 28, 2016, pet. granted) (mem. op.)

In suit affecting the parent-child relationship (SAPCR) in which grandparents sought managing conservatorship over the child, court of appeals concluded that the grandparents did not have standing to file the SAPCR because they did not have actual care and control over the child for the statutory required six months.

Luig v. North Bay Enters., Inc., 817 F.3d 901 (5th Cir. 2016).

In a breach of contract case arising out of the sale of a helicopter, the Fifth Circuit vacated the District Court’s sua sponte grant of summary judgment against the buyer on a notice of revocation/rejection of acceptance issue never raised by the seller, finding that the District Court abused its discretion by not considering the evidence of rejection or revocation presented by the buyer in its Rule 59(e) motion.

Archer v. Tunnell, No. 05-15-00549-CV, 2016 WL 519632 (Tex. App.—Dallas Feb. 9, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.)

Dismissing interlocutory appeal, originating from claim that collision with cow owned by a former doctor was really a health care liability case that required a Chapter 74 expert report, and sanctioning doctor and his attorney for refusing to dismiss frivolous appeal.

In re State Farm Lloyds, No. 13-14-00616-CV, 2015 WL 6520998 (Tex. App.–Corpus Christi Oct. 28, 2015, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Denying mandamus relief and requiring the production of electronically stored information in native or near native format.

Mitchell v. Satyu, No. 05-14-00479-CV, 2015 WL 3765771 (Tex. App.—Dallas June 17, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op.)

Reversing trial court’s dismissal of a medical malpractice case, concluding that trial court abused its discretion in doing so and that the Chapter 74 expert report sufficiently demonstrated a causal relationship between the physician’s negligence and the death of Mr. Mitchell.

In re Equipment Depot, Ltd., No. 14-0981 (Tex. Jan. 21, 2015)

Denial of emergency motion to stay and mandamus relief in a case in which the trial court granted a new trial based on its finding that the jury’s defense verdict was against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence.

Navarro v. Washington, No. 14-0499 (Tex. Nov. 21, 2014)

Successfully defeated petition for review in a medical malpractice case in Navarro v. Washington, 10-13-00248-CV, 2014 WL 1882763 (Tex. App.—Waco May 8, 2014, pet. denied) (mem. op.), which upheld the sufficiency of the patient’s expert doctors’ reports under Chapter 74.

In re Equipment Depot, No. 02-14-00154-CV (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Sept. 8, 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Denial of petition for mandamus when the defendant challenged the trial court’s new trial order which was based on the jury’s verdict being against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence.

In re H.E. Trans, No. 05-14-00340-CV, 2014 WL 2937497 (Tex. App.–Dallas June 26, 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Denial of petition for mandamus when the defendant challenged the trail court’s new trial order entered after the defendant asked the trial court to impose constitutional due process limitations to a punitive damages award.

RJ Meridian Care of Alice, Ltd. v. Robledo, No. 04-14-00195-CV, 2014 WL 2917669 (Tex. App.–San Antonio, June 19, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.)

Dismissal of interlocutory appeal challenging Chapter 74 expert report for want of jurisdiction in a medical malpractice case.

In re Fisher & Paykel Appliances, Inc., 420 S.W.3d 842 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2014, orig. proceeding)

Rejecting the self-critical analysis privilege and requiring the production of relevant reports in a products liability case.

Long v. Elliott, 416 S.W.3d 152 (Tex. App.–Eastland 2013, no pet.)

Requiring return of erroneously forfeited attorney’s fees.

Kelley & Witherspoon, LLP v. Hooper, 401 S.W.3d 841 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2013, no pet.)

Reversing jury verdict in legal malpractice case against law firm where client failed to present medical-expert testimony in support of damage causation

MBR & Associates, Inc. v. Lile, No. 02-11-00431-CV, 2012 WL 4661665 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Oct. 4, 2012, pet. denied) (mem. op.)

Affirming a judgment for approximately $1 million based on findings of fraud, DTPA violations, and gross negligence, as well as a finding piercing the corporate veil, arising out of a contractor’s failed effort to repair a foundation that ruined a homeowner’s house.

Schrapps v. Pham, No. 09-12-00080-CV, 2012 WL 4017768 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Sept. 13, 2012, pet. denied) (mem. op.) (briefed response to Petition for Review)

Denial of petition for review in case challenging a Chapter 74 expert report in a medical malpractice case. 

Ashton Grove v. Jackson Walker, 366 S.W.3d 790 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012, no pet.)

Reversing a summary judgment concluding that a law firm failed to prove that attorney’s fees of over $1 million for just over 2 months of work in representing a small business was reasonable and necessary under the Arthur Anderson factors.

Salas v. Chris Christensen Sys., Inc., No. 10-11-00107-CV, 2011 WL 4089999 (Tex. App.—Waco Sept. 14, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.)

Upholding default judgment after death penalty discovery sanctions, actual and punitive damages, and enforceability of a non-compete agreement.

Capps v. Nexion Health at Southwood, Inc., 349 S.W.3d 849 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2011, no pet.)

Reversing and remanding for a new trial when trial court refused to include the correct corporate entity on the jury form.

Goodner v. Hyundai Motor Co., 650 F.3d 1034 (5th Cir. 2011) 

Upholding jury verdict in an automobile design defect case finding circumstantial evidence to support causation and sufficient evidence of an unreasonably dangerous design and of a safer alternative design.

Adams v. Staxxring, Inc., 344 S.W.3d 641 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011, pet. denied) 

Denying arbitration due to substantial invocation of the judicial process.

Werley v. Cannon., 344 S.W.3d 527 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2011, no pet.)

Upholding monetary sanctions against a defense attorney who violated a court order by making ex parte contacts with a plaintiff’s treating physicians.

In re Oncor Elec. Delivery Co., No. 05-11-00188-CV, 2011 WL 989071 (Tex. App.—Dallas Mar. 22, 2011, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Denying petition for mandamus concerning trial court’s denial of a motion to designate a responsible third party.

In re Kobelt Mfg. Ltd., No. 07-11-0014-CV, 2011 WL 798199 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Mar. 8, 2011, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Denying petition for mandamus concluding that the parties may agree to alter the statutory deadlines for designating responsible third parties.

Perdue, et al. v. Nissan Motor Company, Ltd., No. 09-40881 (5th Cir. 2010)

In a case involving product liability design defect tried to a favorable jury verdict, settling after oral argument.

Elliott v. Hollingshead, 327 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2010, no pet.)

Reversing trial court’s forfeiture of a plaintiff’s attorney’s fees.

In re Professional Pharmacy II, No. 02-10-163-CV, 2010 WL 3718946 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Sept. 23, 2010, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Issued mandamus requiring a jury trial rejecting argument that a signed arbitration provision constituted a jury waiver.

Smith v. Shipp, No. 05-09-01204-CV, 2010 WL 2653733 (Tex. App.—Dallas July 6, 2010, no pet.) (mem. op.)

Reversing a case that had been dismissed for want of prosecution.

In re Deere & Co., 299 S.W.3d 819 (Tex. 2009) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam)

Rejecting John Deere’s argument that a discovery order covering multiple makes and models of equipment was overly broad and unduly burdensome and establishing that a defendant bears the burden of proving the bases for objections raised in discovery.

Vestal v. Wright, No. 2-08-237-CV, 2009 WL 2751020 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Aug. 31, 2009, pet. denied) (mem. op.) 

Affirming denial of a doctor and his urology group’s motion to dismiss based on a challenge to an expert report in a medical malpractice case.

Reeder v. Trinity Industries, Inc., 294 S.W.3d 851 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, pet. denied)

Reversing a summary judgment and an $829,816 judgment on counterclaims asserted against a plaintiff in a commercial real estate case.

Ferguson v. Building Materials Corp. of Am., 295 S.W.3d 642 (Tex. 2009) 

Reversing a summary judgment granted against a personal injury plaintiff based on the doctrine of judicial estoppel due to an inadvertent omission in a bankruptcy filing.

Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LP v. Crosby, 295 S.W.3d 346 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, pet. denied)

Upholding an $869,200 judgment for personal injuries sustained when the plaintiff was hit in the back by a pallet jack being driven by a Wal-Mart employee.

Pinnacle Anesthesia Consultants, P.A. v. Fisher, 309 S.W.3d 93 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, pet. denied).

Affirming an $8.5 million judgment in favor of a physician who was wrongfully terminated from his practice group.

In the Matter of B.B.M., 291 S.W.3d 463 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, pet. denied) 

Reversing a jury verdict in which a jury had awarded managing conservatorship of a child to a non-parent couple instead of to the natural father.

UHS of Timberlawn, Inc. v. S.B., a Minor, 281 S.W.3d 207 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, pet. denied)

Affirming denial of a motion to dismiss based on a challenge to an expert report in a medical malpractice case.

Benish v. Grottie,  281 S.W.3d 184 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2009, pet. denied)

Affirming denial of motion to dismiss based on challenge to an expert report in a medical malpractice case. Also holding that an expert need not opine as to willful and wanton negligence in a chapter 74 report despite argument that case is governed by the Emergency Room statute.

Knapp v. Wilson N. Jones Mem’l Hosp., 281 S.W.3d 163 (Tex.  App.—Dallas 2009, no pet.)

Reversing and remanding a $1,070,643 judgment based on a counterclaim asserted against the Plaintiff for claims of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and negligence.

Turner v. Hendon, 269 S.W.3d 243 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2008, pet. denied)

Reversing and rendering a judgment based on legally insufficient evidence in a case involving a challenge to a deed conveying real property.

Akins v. Radiator Specialty Co., No. Civ. A 3:05-451, 2006 WL 2850444 (W.D. Pa. Sept. 29, 2006)

Granting the Plaintiff’s motion for remand in a toxic tort Benzene exposure case based on a lack of complete federal preemption.

Mireles v. Ashley, 201 S.W.3d 779 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2006, no pet.)

Reversing and remanding the trial court’s granting of a no evidence summary judgment in a negligent hiring case. 

Dallas County v. Hughes, 189 S.W.3d 886 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006, pet. denied)

Affirming the denial of Dallas County’s Plea to the Jurisdiction. 

Zurich American Ins. Co. v. Gill, 173 S.W.3d 878 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005, pet denied)

Affirming claim for workers compensation benefits when carrier does not comply with statutory deadlines for denying a claim.

Carroll v. Bank of New York, No. 10-03-00319-CV, 2005 WL 241224 (Tex. App.—Waco Feb. 2, 2005, no pet.)

Appeal of a forcible entry and detainer action.

Lisanti v. Dixon, 147 S.W.3d 638 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, pet. denied)

Affirming a punitive damages award in a Sabine Pilot wrongful termination case.

Gallardo v. Ugarte, 145 S.W.3d 272 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2004, pet. denied) 

Involved the reversal of a dismissal of a medical malpractice case concerning the adequacy of a 4590i expert report.

Brown & Root, Inc. v. Moore, 92 S.W.3d 848 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2002, pet. denied) 

Affirming a punitive damages award in an asbestos case.