
Significant Victories
State v. T.S.N., 523 S.W.3d 171 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2017), aff'd, 547 S.W.3d 617 (Tex. 2018)
In a case of first impression, the court of appeals affirmed an order granting the expunction of records relating to an arrest for felony aggravated assault for which T.S.N. was subsequently acquitted. The State, claiming that the entire expunction statute is “arrest based,” argued that the records could not be expunged because, when T.S.N. was arrested, she was also arrested on a totally unrelated misdemeanor theft charge to which she ultimately pled guilty. The court of appeals rejected this “arrest-based” interpretation, concluding that, based on the plain language of article 55.01(a)(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a guilty plea to a wholly unrelated offense does not prohibit the expunction of records related to the acquitted offense, even where the arrest arises out of both.
In the Interest of P.M.K., No. 05-15-01181-CV, 2017 WL 462343 (Tex. App.—Dallas Jan. 30, 2017, no pet.)(mem. op.)
Successfully defended Texas and Louisiana courts' determination that, while Texas court had jurisdiction as the child’s “home state” under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, Louisiana court was the more convenient forum and therefore could exercise jurisdiction over child custody determination.
Hornbuckle v. Keller Williams Realty, No. 02-15-00398-CV, 2016 WL 7405807 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Dec. 22, 2016, no pet. h.) (mem. op.)
Dismissing appeal pursuant to vexatious litigant statute, where Hornbuckle repeatedly filed lawsuits contesting the foreclosure on a specific piece of real property in Arlington, Texas, including this case. The court of appeals concluded that the trial court’s dismissal of the underlying lawsuit was proper, and dismissal of Hornbuckle’s appeal was proper pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Ch. 11.
Young v. Pulte Homes of Tex., L.P., No. 02-14-00224-CV, 2016 WL 4491517 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Aug. 26, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.)
In a personal injury case arising out of faulty construction of family’s new home, the court of appeals reversed the trial court’s judgment which dismissed the parents’ claims for failing to disclose the claims in bankruptcy. The court of appeals also reversed the trial court’s award of sanctions under the DTPA, finding that the children’s DTPA claims were not groundless.
Premier Pools Mgmt. Co. v. Premier Pools, Inc., No. 05-14-01388-CV, 2016 WL 4258830 (Tex. App.—Dallas Aug. 12, 2016, pet. denied) (mem. op.)
In common law trademark case, upholding jury’s findings of secondary meaning, trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and unfair competition, and award of lost profits, disgorged profits, and permanent injunctive relief.
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.
Blaylock v. Holland, No. 05-13-01197-CV, 2014 WL 3736210 (Tex. App.— Dallas July 14, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.)
Reversing a trial court’s refusal to award clients trial court costs following successful appeal of adverse judgment.
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.
CKH Family Ltd. P’ship v. MGD/CCP Acquisition, LLC, No. 05-12-00573-CV, 2013 WL 5614304 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 14, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op.)
Successfully defended order dismissing claims based on parties’ contractual forum selection clause.
Blaylock v. Holland, 396 S.W.3d 720 (Tex. App.— Dallas 2013, no pet.)
Reversing a trial court’s award of a homeowner’s property to his neighbor by adverse possession, holding that neighbor’s assumption that homeowner’s property was part of neighbor’s backyard, and neighbor’s use of that property as part of her backyard, was legally insufficient to support the trial court’s award by adverse possession.
Richardson v. Richardson, No. 05-12-01123-CV, 2013 WL 3326870 (Tex. App.— Dallas June 27, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op.)
Successfully defended judgment appointing client as sole managing conservator of his children following week-long child custody jury trial.
Williams v. Dallas County, No. 05-06-01142-CV, 2007 WL 3121670 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 26, 2007, no pet.) (mem. op.)
Successfully reversed summary judgment granted in favor of self-insured workers’ compensation carrier on the issue of the claimant’s “follow-on” injury
Plano Parkway Office Condominiums v. Beaver Properties, 246 S.W.3d 188 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2007, pet. denied)
Reversing a summary judgment in a case of first impression involving the interpretation of the Texas Condominium Act.
Perez v. Kleinart, 211 S.W.3d 468 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2006, no pet.)
Reversing a defense verdict in a personal injury case and remanding for a new trial.
Ex parte M.R.R., 223 S.W.3d 499 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2006, pet. dism’d)
Successfully affirmed judgment of expunction by defeating State’s argument that statutory limitation period does not apply to misdemeanor arrests
Redland Ins. Co. v. Southwest Stainless, L.P., 181 S.W.3d 509 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005, no pet.)
Upheld judgment against surety on payment bond where surety complained of technical notice given to general contractor
Gibson v. Ellis, 126 S.W.3d 324 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, no pet.)
Upheld jury verdict in favor of defendant attorney in legal malpractice case, including award of sanctions in favor of defendant attorney
Ter-Vartanyan v. R&R Freight, Inc., 111 S.W.3d 779 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, pet. denied)
Upholding admissibility of expert reconstruction testimony of investigating officer