Janet Elliott

A seemingly mundane child custody battle between two divorced parents has attracted an extraordinary collection of Texas appellate talent. It has also attracted the amicus attention of the Texas attorney general. Janet Elliott explains.

Emails can be useful tools for negotiation, but they aren’t definitive until both sides agree they are, wrote Nathan Hecht in Chalker Energy Partners III v. Le Norman Operating. Janet Elliott has details.

Two cases decided by the Texas Supreme Court last week involved
lawsuits against lawyers. One involved representational immunity, the other criminal defense malpractice. Not all they had to say favored lawyers. Janet Elliott explains.

Fort Worth is trying to control the proliferation of game rooms that have “eight-liners”—slot machines that issue coupons for lavish prizes like game systems or other electronics. The operators of those coin-operated amusement machines are fighting back. Janet Elliott explains the issue and how it relates to Chuck E. Cheese.

In some cases, emails can spell out the terms of a contract. But the Texas Supreme Court ruled last week that landowners seeking compensation for a pipeline never constructed couldn’t make that case. Janet Elliott explains.

The Supreme Court ruled Friday that a 1987 will handing down ownership of a Zapata County ranch included its mineral interests. Though it took him six charts to do so, Chief Justice Nathan Hecht showed that the mineral interests were distributed to her heirs exactly as Leonor Ramirez intended.

Having once rejected this case involving an out-of-state insulation company, the Texas Supreme Court heard arguments last week reconsidering the threshold of Texas products liability jurisdiction. Janet Elliott reports.

The argument before SCOTX is whether two parties can create an interest in real property that remains vested long after the agreement – or even the parties themselves – cease to be. Janet Elliott reports.

A bankruptcy judge who brought an ethics complaint against McAllen lawyer Mark Cantu should not have been excluded from testifying in the resulting disciplinary trial, SCOTX has ruled in a per curiam decision. Janet Elliott explains why it was even a question.