Free Speech, Due Process and Trial by Jury
Dolcefino Communications, a for-hire investigative firm run by former longtime Houston television news reporter Wayne Dolcefino, had argued the specific dollar amounts the nonprofit paid to each performer during the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo had to be disclosed in response to his open records request. The First Court of Appeals panel determined otherwise in this case of first impression.
Ashley Moore, who most recently served as the Dallas office managing partner at Michelman & Robinson, joined Greenberg Traurig’s intellectual property and litigation practices this week as a shareholder. She spoke to The Lawbook about trends she's seeing in the Eastern and Western District of Texas.
At the request of his father, Austin attorney Dov Preminger took on a case a few years ago for a contractor who didn’t get paid about $50,000 for work he performed.
Preminger’s work on the case came to about $13,000 in fees and expenses. While he and his client won a default judgment for the full requested amount, they were only able to garnish a bank account for about $3,000, which was split between the client, the bank’s lawyer and Preminger.
Preminger tells that story to illustrate the potential usefulness artificial intelligence can provide to lawyers and clients as he gradually launches LitLaw, a “legal AI company” that instantly generates first drafts of lawsuits, answers, demand letters, discovery requests and more. LitLaw will eventually be able to draft more complex motions, Preminger said.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said Tuesday’s settlement is the largest ever obtained by an attorney general in a privacy case. This is the first lawsuit brought and settlement reached under Texas’ Capture or Use of Biometric Identifier, the AG added.
In this edition of Litigation Roundup, we detail a case where an intermediate appellate court seems dubious about a real estate developer’s claim that he missed a deadline to appeal because he suffered a stroke, Southwest Airlines is hit with a suit over an alleged in-flight sexual assault, and a woman accused of stealing more than $100 million from the government goes to prison.
Many people know that Texas’s new system of business courts opens in September. What they may not know is how, er, nuanced business court jurisdiction is. There are, however, two steps every company may take now to ensure they may invoke business court jurisdiction later. Of course, anyone wishing to avoid business court jurisdiction should simply apply Costanza’s razor and “do the opposite.”
Dallas commercial litigator Mark L. Johansen has moved to boutique law firm Egan Nelson, the firm announced this week. Johansen spoke with The Lawbook about his reasons for the move and a pending case he is considering removing to the new business courts.
There have been reports of some confusion regarding whether cases pending in Texas state courts on Aug. 31 that otherwise satisfy the jurisdictional requirements of the Texas business court can be removed to the business court after it opens its doors on Sept. 1. The answer is clear. Attempts to remove these cases should be rejected by the business court.
The clear intent of HB19’s authors was that pending cases in Texas state courts should not be pulled and sent to the business court Sept. 1. With the small number of judges initially serving the business court, the limited history, precedent and resources of the business court when it opens, and the potential for constitutional challenge, it was recognized that the business court would not have the resources to respond to a possible avalanche of hundreds if not thousands of pending cases.
© 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.