Significant Victories
Wright v. Menta, No. 05-15-00272-CV, 2016 WL 3141578 (Tex. App.—Dallas June 6, 2016, pet. denied) (mem. op.)
Affirming arbitration award and rejecting argument that arbitration award should be vacated based on manner in which attorney’s fees records were submitted, and rejecting argument that award regarding interest in patents was unenforceably vague.
Austin v. Coface Seguro de Credito Mexico, S.A. de C.V., 506 S.W.3d 707 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2016, pet. denied).
In appeal involving validity of abstract of judgment, court of appeals found that abstract filed under Hispanic judgment debtor's maternal surname was sufficient to give notice of the judgment to the public.
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.
Siddiqui v. Fancy Bites, LLC, 504 S.W.3d 349 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, pet. denied)
In a commercial fraud-by-nondisclosure case involving the development and operation of a fried chicken franchise, Houston's Fourteenth Court of Appeals upheld the award of nearly $600,000 in damages--including $100,000 in exemplary damages.
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.
City of Houston v. Roman, No. 01-15-01042-CV, 2016 WL 3748851 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] July 12, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.)
Affirming trial court’s denial of City’s plea to the jurisdiction arising out of injuries suffered when a City of Houston police dog attacked and injured a minor. The court of appeals held that use of the police dog was not an intentional tort, but the negligent use of tangible personal property for which the Texas Tort Claims Act waived immunity.
Poledore v. Poledore, No. 05-15-00619-CV, 2016 WL 2620648 (Tex. App.—Dallas May 6, 2016, pet. denied) (mem. op.)
Upholding a post-answer default judgment in a divorce proceeding, where the appellant attempted to challenge the judgment on due process grounds, but failed to file a motion for new trial or introduce evidence satisfying the Craddock factors.
Harlingen Med. Ctr. Ltd. P’ship v. Andrade, No. 13-14-0700-CV, No. 13-15-0119-CV, 2016 WL 1613297 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi April 21, 2016, pet. dismissed)
Affirming trial court’s ruling refusing to dismiss medical malpractice case based on the defendants’ challenge to the Chapter 74 expert reports.
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.
Hancock v. Nicoley, 392 P.3d 175 (N.M. Ct. App. 2016)
Reversing error of district court in awarding windfall of parcel of land in boundary dispute between neighboring ranchers.
Ginn v. NCI Bldg. Sys., Inc., 472 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2015, no pet.)
The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment against Ginn, who NCI Building Systems had sued for theft of trade secrets.
William Marsh Rice Univ. v. Refaey, 459 S.W.3d 590 (Tex. 2015)
The Supreme Court concluded that the court of appeals erred in dismissing for want of jurisdiction Rice University's appeal. Pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 51.014, Rice University sought interlocutory review of the trial court's denial of summary judgment based on official immunity.
Bay Area Healthcare Group, Ltd. v. Martinez, No. 13-15-00118-CV, 2015 WL 7352596 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi Nov. 19, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op.)
Successfully convinced court of appeals that housekeeper's claim for injuries suffered when medical center employer required her to lift very heavy items was not a health care liability claim to which Chapter 74 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code applied.
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.
Katy Springs & Mfg. Inc. v. Favalora, 476 S.W.3d 579 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2015, pet. denied)
Affirming almost the entirety of a judgment in excess of $800,000 in a nonsubscriber case against a negligent employer. In addition to raising the usual factual and legal sufficiency arguments regarding the liability and damage findings, the defendant also raised points relating to the financing of the medical expenses, the exclusion of certain evidence, improper jury argument, and charge error, all of which were overruled by the court of appeals.
Okon v. Boldon, No. 02-14-00334-CV, 2015 WL 4652775 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Aug. 6, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op.)
Upholding a default judgment in favor of a personal injury plaintiff, where the defendant attempted to challenge the judgment through a bill of review more than four years after the judgment was entered, claiming extrinsic fraud in the manner in which substituted service was executed.
Kroger Co. v. Milanes, 474 S.W.3d 321 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2015, no pet.)
Affirming a $1.1 million judgment in favor of injured Kroger employee following an incident in which he lost four fingers on his dominant hand, and in the process rejecting Kroger's arguments, among many others, that its duties should be limited to those owed by premises owners to invitees--meaning no duty to train or supervise, hire competent co-employees, provide appropriate instrumentalities, etc.--based on the Texas Supreme Court's recent opinion in Austin v. Kroger.
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.