Texas juries delivered several nine-digit verdicts this year in a wide range of cases — from patent infringement disputes to fatal personal injury claims. The Lawbook has compiled a list of the 10 largest jury awards of the year.
Harris County jurors returned what is believed to be the largest damages award of the year: a $1.2 billion verdict to a woman who accused her ex-boyfriend of posting sexually explicit photos and videos of her in the wake of their breakup.
Damages awarded by Harris County jurors took three of the Top 10 spots, handing out of total of $1.9 billion in those cases alone.
And predictably jurors tasked with deciding patent disputes in the Eastern and Western districts of Texas awarded several verdicts exceeding $200 million in damages. Jurors in the Western District doled out awards that took three of the Top 10 spots and totaled $857.7 million.
Here’s a rundown of the cases and an update on where they stand post-verdict:
Doe v. Jackson — Harris County District Court
$1.2B Verdict in Revenge Porn Case
In August, a jury of 12 unanimously sided with a Jane Doe plaintiff in a lawsuit alleging Marques Jamal Jackson, her ex-boyfriend, posted sexually explicit photos and videos of her online without her consent after their relationship ended.
Trial started and ended on Aug. 9, with the jury awarding $100 million for past mental anguish, $100 million for future mental anguish and $1 billion in exemplary damages against Jackson.
Jackson did not hire an attorney or appear pro se in the lawsuit that was filed in April 2022, nor did he participate in discovery or trial.
Harris County District Judge Rabeea Collier presided over the case and granted Doe’s motion for a default no-answer judgment as to liability in March. According to the docket, a hearing took place on a motion for entry of final judgment before Judge Collier in November and she took the matter under advisement.
An appeal has not been filed in the case.
Doe alleged she started dating Jackson in 2016 and the couple moved to Chicago together that year after Jackson accepted a job there. The relationship ended after a “long and drawn out break up” in October 2021, and Doe moved back to Harris County.
Soon thereafter, Doe alleges, Jackson created a public website with a Dropbox folder containing “intimate visual material” and sent links to Doe’s friends, family and coworkers.
Doe is represented by Bradford J. Gilde of Gilde Law Firm in Houston and Jacob G. Schiffer of Schiffer Law Firm.
The case number is 2022-20061.
Flores v. Bigge Crane — Dallas County District Court
$860M Verdict in Fatal Crane Collapse Case
In a case where plaintiff lawyers were seeking $700 million in damages stemming from the 2019 death of 29-year-old Kiersten Smith, the jury exceeded the request, awarding her parents Michele Williams and James Kirkwood $860 million.
Smith was killed in 2019 when a 200-foot steel crane toppled onto her apartment building from an adjacent construction site. Her parents sued Greystar Development & Construction and its related entities — which together were the owner, developer and construction contractor of the site where the incident occurred — as well as Bigge Crane and Rigging, which owned and leased the crane.
Jurors were told Smith was standing feet away from her fiancé when the crane fell into her Old East Dallas apartment during a June 2019 storm and that the collapse was the result of grave, persistent safety lapses on behalf of Greystar, which under the terms of an agreement with Bigge was solely responsible for operating, inspecting and maintaining the crane.
The jury returned its verdict on the first day of deliberations in April after hearing two weeks of testimony in the courtroom of Dallas County Court at Law Judge Melissa Ballan.
Smith’s family was represented at trial by Jason Itkin and Cory Itkin of Arnold & Itkin and Michael P. Lyons of Lyons Simmons. Greystar was represented by Christopher C. White, managing partner of Lewis Brisbois Dallas office, and Dana Alden Fox of the firm’s Los Angeles office.
Greystar lodged an appeal with the Fifth Court of Appeals in Dallas on Nov. 20.
On appeal Greystar is represented by Anne M. Johnson and Jeffrey M. Tillotson of Tillotson Johnson & Patton, Nina Cortell and Ben L. Mesches of Haynes Boone, Scott A. Brister of Hunton Andrews Kurth and Christopher C. white and Katherine Compton of Steptoe & Johnson.
The case number in the trial court is CC-23-07310. The case number on appeal is 05-23-01168-CV.
Johnson v. Union Pacific — Harris County District Court
$557.1M Verdict in Train Crash Injury Suit
In March, a jury found Union Pacific Railroad 80 percent liable for a crash with a pedestrian who suffered a traumatic brain injury and amputations of one leg and several fingers in March 2016, awarding $57.1 million in actual damages and $500 million in punitive damages.
The jury determined that Mary Johnson, who was sitting or asleep on the tracks, was 20 percent responsible for the incident. Johnson had alleged that Union Pacific’s train wasn’t properly illuminated on the night of the incident and that the conductor could have stopped the train to avoid hitting her.
In November 2016, Johnson sued Union Pacific. The case was assigned to Harris County District Judge Michael Gomez.
Union Pacific filed notice of appeal with the First Court of Appeals in Houston Dec. 5 but has not yet filed a brief. In challenging the jury’s verdict, UP argued to the trial court in part that it was wrong to exclude evidence of Johnson’s prior issues with alcohol abuse.
The railroad is represented by Kent Rutter, Lynne Liberato, Christina Crozier and Ryan P. Pitts of Haynes Boone, Dale Wainwright and Nicole Córdoba of Greenberg Traurig and John W. Proctor, Robert K. Piwetz and Sherly S. Norman of Brown, Proctor & Howell.
Johnson is represented by Andrew R. Gould, J. Kyle Findley, John G. Grinnan and Kala Sellers of Arnold & Itkin.
The case number in the trial court is 2016-80991. The case number on appeal is 01-23-00900-CV.
Touchstream Technologies v. Google — Western District of Texas
$338.7M Verdict in Chromecast Patent Trial
A weeklong trial in July ended with jurors in Waco deciding that Google had infringed three video casting patents held by Touchstream Technologies with its Chromecast product and must pay damages totaling $338.7 million.
Trial began before U.S. District Judge Alan Albright July 17 and ended July 21 with the unanimous decision in favor of Touchstream, which does business as Shodogg.
Google filed a motion for a new trial and a motion for judgment as a matter of law in September and Judge Albright hasn’t yet issued a ruling on either motion.
Shodogg had obtained the patents from the inventor David Strober in 2011 and filed suit in June 2021. Strober had developed the technology while working as an e-learning instructional designer at Westchester Community College, according to court documents. Google initially was interested in a potential partnership with Strober, but after about a year of discussions, in February 2012, Google said it was no longer interested in pursuing the business partnership.
In July 2013, Google unveiled Chromecast.
Google is represented by Gregory Lanier, Michael C. Hendershot, Evan M. McLean, Gurneet Singh, Tracy Ann Stitt, Jennifer L. Swize, Edwin O. Garcia and John R. Boulé III of Jones Day and Michael E. Jones and Shaun W. Hassett of Potter Minton.
Touchstream Technologies is represented by B. Trent Webb, Ryan D. Dykal, Lauren Douville, Jordan T. Bergsten, Robert A. McClendon, Philip A. Eckert, Sharon A. Israel, Michael W. Gray, Andrew M. Long and Robert H. Reckers of Shook, Hardy & Bacon.
The case number is 6:21-cv-00569.
Kou v. Kou — Bexar County District Court
$325M Verdict in Child Sex Assault Case
A Bexar County jury handed down a massive award in a lawsuit that accused a grandfather of repeatedly sexually assaulting his grandchild, who was between 5 and 8 years old when the abuses took place.
The lawsuit was filed by Marcia Kou in May 2018 against Steve Kou. The jury trial took place in June, and Bexar County District Judge Nadine Nieto entered final judgment July 20.
The civil trial followed Kou’s criminal conviction and sentencing to 60 years in prison for sexual abuse of a child in 2016. The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio affirmed the conviction and sentence in November 2017 and the Court of Criminal Appeals refused a petition for review in June 2018.
According to court documents, Kou lived in a house with his ex-wife, his son, his son’s wife Marcia and his granddaughter from 2011 until 2014. The child made an outcry of abuse to Marcia a few days before her ninth birthday and an examination revealed the girl had contracted herpes.
During the civil trial, where Steve Kou represented himself, he advanced to the jury alternative theories of how the child contracted the sexually transmitted disease.
The plaintiff lawyers had requested the jury award $125 million in pain and suffering damages and $125 million in punitive damages. But the jury awarded $125 million in pain and suffering damages and $200 million in punitive damages.
The verdict has not been appealed.
Marcia Kou is represented by Jacob Zachary Mancha of Mancha Law and The Carlson Law Firm.
Steve Kou represented himself.
The case number is 2018CI08789.
Netlist v. Samsung — Eastern District of Texas
$303M Verdict in Computer Memory Patent Trial
Samsung Electronics America and Samsung Electronics Co. were hit with a $303 million verdict after jurors agreed with semiconductor manufacturer Netlist that Samsung had continued to use products that infringed its computer memory technology patents after a license agreement expired in 2020.
In April, the jury in U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap’s courtroom heard five days of testimony and deliberated for about three hours before handing Netlist a complete win on all claims, including that the infringement was willful.
Netlist was awarded $33.1 million for infringement of one patent, $147.2 million for infringement of two other patents and $122.7 million for infringement of two additional patents.
Samsung tried to stay the case two days before trial, arguing that a case pending at the Ninth Circuit regarding its license to the asserted patents “and resolution of inter partes review of the asserted patents” should be decided first.
In October, Samsung told the court in briefing that the Ninth Circuit had undone a trial court’s ruling that Netlist properly terminated the licensing agreement with Samsung. And on Dec. 11, Samsung filed a brief informing the court that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board had invalidated all claims of two patents, which would wipe out $303.1 million of the award against it.
Samsung is seeking a new trial.
Netlist is represented by Jennifer Truelove, Samuel Baxter and Kevin Burgess of McKool Smith and Jason Sheasby, Annita Zhong, Thomas C. Werner, Andrew Strabone, Yanan Zhao, Michael W. Tezyan and Rebecca Carson of Irell & Manella.
Samsung is represented by Katherine H. Reardon, Ruffin B. Cordell, Michael J. McKeon, Lauren A. Degnan, Brian Livedalen, Daniel A. Tishman, Matthew Mosteller, Sara C. Fish, Francis J. Albert, Thomas H. Reger II, Matthew Colvin and Karolina Jesien of Fish & Richardson, Melissa Richards Smith of Gillam & Smith and Alice J. Ahn and Brian R. Nester of Covington & Burling.
The case number is 2:21-cv-00463.
Textron v. SZ DJI Technology — Western District of Texas
$279M Verdict in Drone Technology Patent Trial
In a case where Textron Innovations alleged Chinese drone manufacturer Da-Jiang Innovations, also known as SZ DJI Technology Co., of infringing two patents, jurors in April agreed, awarding $30.7 million in damages for infringement of one patent and $248.2 million in damages for infringement of the other patent.
Textron, a U.S. aerospace defense company, filed suit in July 2021, alleging infringement of the patents for auto-hover and vehicle tracking that originally belonged to its sister company, Bell Textron, by SZ DJI, which controls more than 70 percent of the worldwide drone market.
The jury in U.S. District Judge Alan Albright’s courtroom began hearing testimony April 17 and returned its verdict April 21, that included a finding the infringement was willful.
SZ DJI filed motions for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial or remittitur, which were argued at a hearing before Judge Albright Nov. 14.
A ruling has not been issued.
Textron Innovation is represented by Mark Speegle, Kurt Pankratz, Harrison Rich, Morgan Mayne, Emily Felvey, Boyang Zhang and Arya Moshiri of Baker Botts, Kevin J. Meek of McDermott Will & Emery, and Mark D. Siegmund and Melissa S. Ruiz of Cherry Johnson Siegmund James.
SZ DJI Technology Co. is represented by Benjamin R. Schlesinger, Qingyu Yin, J. Michael Jakes, Sydney Kestle, Robert K. High. Jacob A. Schroeder, Jinwoo Kim and Yanyi Liu of Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner and John P. Palmer, John A. “Andy” Powell and Jacqueline P. Altman of Naman Howell Smith & Lee.
The case number is 6:21-cv-00740.
StreamScale v. Cloudera — Western District of Texas
$240M Verdict in Cloud Storage Technology Case
A Waco jury in October found that StreamScale, which owns patents for what it describes as the “cornerstone” of modern data storage, was entitled to $240 million in damages.
The jury that sat through three days of testimony in U.S. District Judge Alan Albright’s courtroom found Cloudera had infringed three patents covering “accelerated erasure coding” that are related to cloud storage technology.
StreamScale had sued the California-based data management company in March 2021.
On Nov. 29 Cloudera filed a motion for a new trial and Judge Albright entered an order Dec. 6 staying execution of judgment until all pending motions have been resolved.
StreamScale is represented by Jamie McDole, Mike Karson, Phillip Philbin, Dave Higer, Grant Tucker, Matt Vitale, Nikki Becraft, Amanda Johnson and Pam Jones of Winstead, Jason G. Sheasby, Lisa Glasser and Stephen M. Payne of Irell & Manella and Massimo Ciccarelli of Ciccarelli Law Firm.
Cloudera is represented by Audrey Lo, Brock S. Weber, Christopher Kao, John J. Steger, Steven P. Tepera, Surui Ou, Benjamin L. Bernell and Christopher Lee Drymalla of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman.
The case number is 6:21-cv-00198.
Computer Sciences Corporation v. Tata — Northern District of Texas
$210M Verdict in Software Trade Secrets Trial
On Nov. 17, a jury determined business software company Computer Sciences Corporation was entitled to $210 million in damages in a trade secrets lawsuit where it accused Tata Consultancy Services of stealing source code to “unfairly compete” in the life insurance and annuities administration and processing market.
CSC was awarded $70 million in damages for Tata’s unjust enrichment that flowed from the misappropriation of its trade secrets and $140 million in exemplary damages after finding Tata had “willfully and maliciously misappropriated” the source code.
U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr has yet to enter final judgment in the case but set a deadline for entry of judgment motions to be filed by Jan. 9.
John Bash, former U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas and current partner with Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, filed notice Dec. 14 that he was now serving as additional counsel for Tata.
The jury sat through six days of testimony in the case that involved two proprietary software platforms owed by CSC that are used to administer and process annuities and life insurance premiums across the country.
The jury heard that developing those sophisticated programs took decades of development and millions of dollars and that Tata unlawfully misappropriated the source code in an effort to compete without making the same kind of development investment as CSC.
Computer Sciences Corporation is represented by Justin Sumner, Amanda Bridson and Steve Sumner of Sumner Schick & Pace and Bethany Salpietra, Bryan Parrish, Griffin Tolle, Jacob McDonald, Jacqueline Chan, James Williams, Kurt M. Pankratz, Susan Cannon Kennedy and Thomas E. O’Brien of Baker Botts.
Tata Consultancy Services Limited is represented by Anand K. Sharma, Cara E. Regan, Charles T. Collins-Chase, Daniel M. Jordan, Gerald F. Ivey, John M. Williamson, Joseph Schaffner, Karthik Kumar, Luke J. McCammon, Rajeev Gupta and Sydney R. Kestle of Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner and Jessica Barger and Raffi Melkonian of Wright Close & Barger.
The case number is 3:19-cv-00970.
Schneider v. Terra Energy Partners — Harris County District Court
$209M Verdict in Wrongful Death Case
After a two-week trial, jurors awarded the widow of Karl Schneider, 38, who was working for Terra Energy Partners in Colorado when he contracted a deadly virus, damages totaling $209 million.
According to court documents, Terra reached a post-trial settlement with Laura Schneider, who had filed suit against the company in November 2019, following her husband’s death in September 2019.
Schneider alleged her husband, who was living and working on a job site for Terra at the time, had contracted hantavirus, which is carried by mice and can be contracted by humans who come into contact with the rodent’s droppings, urine or saliva.
Terra knew about the risks of contracting the virus but failed to inform employees, Schneider alleged.
Attorneys for the Schneiders said in a news release that prior to trial Terra had offered their client a $200,000 settlement.
The Schneiders are represented by Caj Boatright, Roland Christensen and Kurt B. Arnold of Arnold & Itkin and Daniel Johnson, Juan C. Garcia and William Mejia of Johnson Garcia.
Terra is represented by Natasha N. Taylor and Emily C. Freeman of Wright Close & Barger, Gregory A. Holloway and Marshall W. Haley of Thompson Coe Cousins & Irons and R. Alan York of Reed Smith.
Editor’s Note: Bruce Tomaso contributed to this report.