Free Speech, Due Process and Trial by Jury
Two others with intermediate appellate court experience were named to the appellate court by Gov. Abbott, who also announced appointments to the new Austin business court division. The governor still must name judges for business court divisions in Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston and San Antonio. The Texas Lawbook's Janet Elliott has the details.
Answers to the governor’s questionnaire shed some light on the judicial philosophies of some 30 who have applied for the coming business trial and appellate courts. Generally, they like conservatives like Scalia and Thomas and shun SCOTUS decisions on Obamacare and the Chevron deference.
Editor’s note: This article was written in advance of the governor’s announcements Wednesday.
On Thursday, Justice Sonya Sotomayor delivered the 8-0 opinion of the court that held Truck Insurance Exchange should have been allowed to voice its concerns about the terms of a proposed $50 million settlement of thousands of asbestos-related lawsuits because the insurer is a “party in interest” in the dispute. Gibson Dunn's Allyson Ho argued the case and spoke to The Lawbook about its implications.
A little more than a week before trial was slated to begin, a settlement has apparently been reached in a case where Texas alleged Meta Platforms, formerly known as Facebook, had unlawfully used the biometric data of Texans without their consent and for commercial use.
In a petition for a writ of injunction filed with the state’s high court Wednesday afternoon, Dallas County alleges numerous ways the structure of the new court violates the state’s constitution. In June, the Legislature passed and the governor signed into law S.B. 1045, which created the Fifteenth Court of Appeals and granted it exclusive, statewide jurisdiction over certain cases involving the state or state officials. The jurisdiction of the state’s other 14 intermediate appellate courts is tethered to the district and county courts within its geographic region, which Dallas County argues is constitutionally required.
The Texas Supreme Court reversed a $12 million jury verdict on Friday because the plaintiffs’ lawyer during closing arguments injected the idea of racial and gender bias as a possible reason that the defendants wanted reduced amounts awarded to the plaintiffs, one of whom is an African American woman. The justices said the plaintiffs’ lawyer injected “inflammatory argument that was uninvited and unprovoked” in his final comments to the jury that essentially accused opposing counsel of race and gender discrimination when no evidence of either existed in the trial record.
Court reporter Jo Ann Holmgren and her firm, Preferred Legal Services, are seeking a court finding that the Judicial Branch Certification Commission failed to do its job when it dismissed a complaint of alleged violations of court reporting laws by a digital recording company. The Third Court of Appeals rejected the JBCC’s appeal and remanded the case to the trial court.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit determined Tuesday that U.S. District Judge Gray H. Miller got it wrong when he handed down a massive $1.6 billion judgment against International Business Machines for breach and fraud in a lawsuit against Houston-based BMC Software.
The ruling is likely to result in more discrimination cases about job changes surviving defense challenges and moving forward to trial.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday unanimously revived the lawsuit that the U.S. Fifth Court of Appeals had dismissed with a one-paragraph ruling. Daniel Charest of Burns Charest, who is the lead trial attorney for the landowners, was confident about the outcome of the case when he was present for oral arguments in January and heard what he viewed as an important admission from Texas Solicitor General Aaron L. Nielson, who was arguing for the state.
© 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.