Free Speech, Due Process and Trial by Jury
Michelle Casady is based in Houston and covers litigation and appeals — including trials, breaking news and industry trends — for The Texas Lawbook.
Michelle Casady has been a reporter in Texas since January 2009. She's covered crime at The Bryan-College Station Eagle, courts at the San Antonio Express-News and civil litigation for Law360. In July 2022, she joined The Texas Lawbook.
Her reporting has included covering arrests, trials, plea deals and settlements, executions, natural and manmade disasters, colorful characters and various oddities.
She lives in Houston with her husband Matt, a sweet dog Hurricane Harvey brought into their lives, and a confident cat who keeps everyone in line. She holds a bachelor's degree in journalism from Texas Tech University and was a 2018 fellow of the Loyola Marymount University Journalist Law School.
You can reach Michelle at michelle.casady@texaslawbook.net or (713) 614-7929.
This edition of Litigation Roundup features a dispute over unlicensed use of a viral video in which a Chevrolet pickup truck drove through a tornado, a claim that the Department of Education’s loan forgiveness program violates the Administrative Procedure Act and a shareholder derivative lawsuit against Energy Transfer.
In an order issued Wednesday, the court vacated a panel’s Aug. 3 ruling that ended the lawsuit and set the case for rehearing before the entire court. The three-judge panel that issued the original ruling siding with Dallas County called for en banc review in the opinion, lamenting that court precedent mandated dismissal of the suit challenging a gender-based scheduling policy.
The Texas Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Oct. 26 in the case that asks it to decide whether a group of cotton farmers suing Helena Chemical Co. for crop damage allegedly caused by the aerial application of an herbicide have presented enough evidence to survive a no-evidence motion for summary judgment. In amicus briefs recently filed, the Chamber and the Texas Wine and Grape Growers Association each warned the court of dire consequences that could flow from its ruling.
In this week’s edition of Litigation Roundup, a settlement nears in a patent dispute over Formula One racing safety technology, a Texas lawyer takes his fight with a California wine entrepreneur to the Texas Supreme Court and a former NFL Pro Bowl cornerback blames a Houston-area clinic for a failed drug test.
In a list of orders issued Friday morning, the state’s high court decided the case without hearing oral argument, agreeing with the plaintiff and defendant in an underlying lawsuit over an automobile crash that Harris County District Judge Dedra Davis abused her discretion in ordering the remote trial. Three prominent trial lawyer groups filed amicus briefs in the case arguing the order was unconstitutional.
Former NBA All-Star Jermaine O’Neal filed a lawsuit in Dallas County District Court on Monday against the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport on behalf of his company Drive Nation. The lawsuit alleges O’Neal put $14 million of his own money to finance the construction of the sports complex based on promises from airport officials that the surrounding land would be developed.
In this week’s edition of Litigation Roundup, the San Antonio Spurs beat back a lawsuit alleging it infringed two ticket sales technology patents, the SEC pursues a Texas duo in a $12 million Ponzi scheme suit, and the Texas Supreme Court gears up to hear a case involving the intersection of public information and attorney-client privilege.
In a federal lawsuit filed in the Western District of Texas Wednesday afternoon, gun maker Daniel Defense, communications company Motorola Solutions and Schneider Electric, which made and installed door locks at Robb Elementary, all were named as defendants. The suit is seeking unspecified damages to include punitive damages.
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.
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.
© Copyright 2025 The Texas Lawbook
The content on this website is protected under federal Copyright laws. Any use without the consent of The Texas Lawbook is prohibited.