More Stories

A bone-chilling fear swept through lawyers at Baker Botts Thursday when a Dallas jury ruled that the Texas-based law firm acted negligently more than a decade ago when it represented two competing technology companies vying for similar patent protections, but didn’t disclose the potential conflict to its client. The jury placed damages against Baker Botts at $40.5 million.

But 30 seconds later, the fear turned to extraordinary relief when the five-woman and one-man panel also found that Addision-based Axcess International waited three years too long to file its lawsuit against Baker Botts and, as a result, the 700-lawyer firm likely will not have to pay a dime.

Following three weeks of testimony, lawyers for Axcess International and Baker Botts gave closing arguments Wednesday to the six-person jury. Dallas-based Axcess is seeking $51 million in damages.

The Amarillo Court of Appeals vacated an arbitration award based on an arbitrator’s unreasonable delay. The arbitrator took 19 months to make a ruling that parties in the case had agreed would be rendered within 14 days.

Legal advice or a business discussion? This question is the key issue in most privilege disputes about in-house counsel. The Fifth Circuit, in a case involving ExxonMobil, addresses that question in a new opinion and offers practical guidance for in-house counsel.

Atlas is acquiring oil and gas interests in the Rangey field in northwest Colorado from an undisclosed party.