Tanner v. Tex. State Univ., 644 S.W.3d 747 (Tex. App.—Austin 2022, no pet. h.)
Successfully reversed plea to the jurisdiction that dismissed plaintiff’s case, holding that diligence in service of process is not a jurisdictional “statutory prerequisite to a suit” under the Texas Tort Claims Act.

$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.

In re C.A., No. 02-21-00018-CV, 2021 WL 2753533 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth July 1, 2021, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)
Successfully prevented the deposition of a severely impaired plaintiff before an examination to determine competency. An issue of first impression, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals found that Texas Rules of Evidence 104 and 601 apply to and impose a duty on trial courts to examine a deposition witness to determine his competency before the witness is deposed, and that the trial court abused its discretion by compelling the deposition without first conducting that examination.

In re Jerry Gonzalez, Jr., No. 13-21-00025-CV, 2021 WL 689280 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi Feb. 23, 2021, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)
Successfully defended trial court’s order granting motion to quash discovery sought, pursuant to In re North Cypress, “of the fees charged and accepted from other patients for the same medical services that were provided or recommended to the plaintiff,” holding that In re North Cypress was readily distinguishable.

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.

More Significant Victories ⤏

Tammy Holt Argues at The Texas Supreme Court!
Tammy Holt, of our Dallas office, argued at the Texas Supreme Court on November 29, 2023. At issue in this case is whether diligence in service of process is a “statutory prerequisite to suit” for claims brought under the Tort Claims Act.

DP&S attorneys involved in case that recently settled for $19 Million
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.

Tammy Holt wins medical expense discovery fight in the 13th Court of Appeals!
Congratulations to Tammy Holt who successfully defeated a Mandamus Petition filed by a Defendant claiming that In re North Cypress entitled him to broad medical expense discovery and claiming that the doctor’s objections should be overruled because (1) he sought the amounts actually reflected as payment in full on the doctors’ books (as opposed to seeking insurance reimbursement rates), and (2) the parties subpoenaed were experts because they were testifying regarding future medical expenses. In denying the petition, the court held that In Re North Cypress was “readily distinguishable” did not allow discovery “of the fees charged and accepted from other patients for the same medical services that were provided or recommended to the plaintiff.”

Tammy Holt wins rehearing motion in the Dallas Court of Appeals!
Congratulations to Tammy Holt, who–on a motion for rehearing–convinced a panel of the Dallas Court of Appeals 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. Rejecting 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,” 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.

Tammy Holt wins in the San Antonio Court of Appeals!
Congratulations to Tammy Holt and trial counsel, Rey Perez, who won an appeal in the San Antonio Court of Appeals this week. The interlocutory appeal was filed by a private entity who contracted with a governmental entity to manage a nursing home. Claiming derivative sovereign immunity, the private entity tried to claim that it could not be sued because, by contracting with the government, it was entitled to the same immunity from suit the government enjoys. The trial court declined to dismiss the case…

More News Stories ⤏