Earlier this week the University of Texas System’s Board of Regents appealed to the Texas Supreme Court in its fight with IDEXX Laboratories arguing a lower appellate court misinterpreted the parties’ contract in wiping out the victory.
Don’t Answer That Question: Two Settlements Blocked SCOTX from Clarifying a Troublesome Insurance Doctrine
Attorneys who represent property owners have argued that the law has been turned on its head, saddling policyholders with a burden of proof that is squarely on the insurer in every state in the union except Texas. A settlement reached earlier this month — five days before the Texas Supreme Court was going to hear arguments in the case that could have clarified the issue — deprived the state’s high court of its second opportunity to answer certified questions from the Fifth Circuit.
Litigation Roundup: A Patent Suit Against Match Group, Dallas Judge Chided for Slow Ruling, Failed Politician Accused of Embezzling From Business Partners
In this week’s edition of Litigation Roundup, Sidley is representing the Texas Medical Association in its Administrative Procedure Act challenge to the No Surprises Act, CenterPoint is ordered to pay $16 million to an injured worker and a Texas real estate developer is accused by the SEC of a $26 million fraud.
Jury Awards $95.5M in Case of Brain Damage Linked to Dentist Visit
The family of Nevaeh Hall sued the dentist, Bethaniel Jefferson, reaching a settlement with her insurer prior to trial, and also sued a pharmacist Charlotte M. Smith Brown, alleging she told Jefferson to administer an incorrect medication to Hall during the medical emergency. Brown drew Jefferson back into the lawsuit as a potentially liable party, and jurors found the dentist 100 percent liable for the injuries.
Texas Supreme Court Considers Walmart’s Bid to Revive $4M Xerox Suit
During oral arguments before the Texas Supreme Court Wednesday, Justice Jimmy Blacklock expressed some hesitation about the ramifications of adopting an argument from Walmart that it is a third-party beneficiary of a contract between the government and Xerox over the administration of a food-assistance program for low-income individuals.
UT Law Prof Calls Out Texas’ ‘Deliberate Strategy of Judge Shopping’ to SCOTUS
University of Texas School of Law professor Stephen Vladeck filed an amicus brief Monday calling out Texas for undermining “core principles” of Article III standing with “transparent judge-shopping tactics” in its challenges to various Biden administration directives. He told the justices Texas shouldn’t be allowed to “so transparently manipulate the legal system in order to obtain injunctive relief against any party — including the federal government.”
Litigation Roundup: Insurer Sued Over Underpaid Ransomware Attack Claim, FC Dallas Hit With Ticket-Sales Patent Suit, Total and Kinder Morgan Head Back to Trial Court in Insurance Dispute
In this week’s edition of Litigation Roundup, a team from Vinson & Elkins gets a win for the Sabine-Neches Navigation District in a case of first impression involving the Water Resources Development Act, a bus manufacturer is hit with a wrongful death lawsuit over the death of a 6-year-old girl and a Taiwanese pipe maker escapes a wrongful death suit.
Jury Says Ex-GC Breached Fiduciary Duty to Client
A Harris County jury recently determined that Matthew Smith, former general counsel to Microvast, had breached his fiduciary duty to his client, and owed it the cost of a laptop computer it purchased for him. The jurors rejected Smith’s argument that he was entitled to $3.4 million based on an oral agreement for stock options.
Starr Remembered by Lanier as ‘Kind,’ ‘Smart Beyond Measure,’ and ‘Not Perfect’
Mark Lanier, who hired Ken Starr to join his law firm in 2018, recalled helping his mentor navigate his departure from Baylor amid a scandal, Starr’s role as ‘principal architect’ of the firm’s appellate strategy in the $2.5 billion Johnson & Johnson talc powder case and other memories from their nearly 40-year relationship.
Texas Panel Trims Vitol Americas’ Win by $10.5M, Leaves $129M Intact
On appeal, Targa Channelview argued the award rested on a faulty interpretation of the contract between the parties related to a crude oil storage and processing facility. Both Vitol and Targa had an impressive list of legal leaders representing the companies on appeal.