Appeals
Wright Brown & Close, LLP’s Appellate Matters of Note- SSP Partners v. Gladstrong Investments (USA) Corp., No. 05-0721, Tex. Sup. Ct. J., 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 997 (Tex. Nov. 14, 2008).
In this products-liability indemnity action, WBC represented Gladstrong, a domestic importer of an allegedly defective product manufactured by a Chinese corporation and distributed by a Hong Kong corporation (the parent company of our client). In a unanimous decision, the Texas Supreme Court held that a non-manufacturer that does nothing more than facilitate entry of a product into the United States has no duty to indemnify a seller either under the indemnity statute (Chapter 82 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code) or under the common law. The court also rejected use of the “single business enterprise” theory to impose the obligations of one corporation onto another.
Read the Texas Supreme Court’s opinion.
Watch the oral argument.
(Mike Choyke argued on behalf of Gladstrong)
-
Reliance Steel & Aluminum Co. v. Sevcik, No. 06-0422, 51 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1437 (Tex. Sept. 26, 2008).
WBC partnered with Rusty McMains to obtain reversal of a $4 million judgment in a personal-injury case against our client, Reliance Steel. In a unanimous opinion, the Texas Supreme Court held that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of Reliance Steel’s annual gross revenues ($1.9 billion) and that this evidence probably caused the jury to award damages that were inflated substantially.
Read the Texas Supreme Court’s opinion.
Watch the oral argument.
(Tom Wright presented the opening argument on behalf of Reliance Steel)
-
Unauthorized Practice of law Committee v. American Home Assurance Co., 261 S.W.3d 24 (Tex. 2008).
In a widely-reported victory for the insurance industry, the Texas Supreme Court held that the use of staff counsel to defend policyholders who are sued by third parties did not constitute the unauthorized practice of law. WBC successfully represented American Home (alongside Professor Bill Dorsaneo on behalf of Travelers) in defending this practice against a challenge by the Texas State Bar’s Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee.
Read the Texas Supreme Court’s majority opinion.
Listen to the oral argument.
(Tom Wright argued on behalf of American Home) - National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. Crocker, 246 S.W.3d 603 (Tex. 2008).
WBC obtained the reversal of a $1 million judgment against our client, National Union, for allegedly breaching its duty to defend an additional insured under a CGL policy issued to a nursing home. Having tried and lost her personal-injury claims against the named insured based on the conduct of its employee, the plaintiff obtained a default judgment against the employee and then sued National Union for allegedly breaching its duty to defend the employee, an additional insured under the policy. On certified questions from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the Texas Supreme Court unanimously held that an insurance company has no duty to defend an additional insured who does not forward suit papers or otherwise ask for a defense under the named insured’s CGL policy.
Read the Texas Supreme Court’s opinion.
Listen to the oral argument.
(Tom Wright argued on behalf of National Union) - Qwest International Communications, Inc. v. AT&T Corp., 167 S.W.3d 324 (Tex. 2005) (per curiam).
WBC represented Qwest in post-trial motions and on appeal from a jury verdict awarding $350 million in exemplary damages for alleged malice in cutting another company’s fiber-optic cable during Qwest’s cable-laying operations. The punitive-damage award was capped by the trial court and subsequently eliminated by the Texas Supreme Court.
Read the Texas Supreme Court’s opinion. - Rocor International, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 77 S.W.3d 253 (Tex. 2002).
WBC founding partner Tom Wright handled this case in the Texas Supreme Court. This case dealt with whether an excess insurer violated any duty to avoid unreasonable delays in settlement. The Supreme Court analyzed both common law and statutory duties and determined that because no definitive offer was made to settle the claims within the policy limits, National Union had not violated any duty. The Court interpreted the statutory unfair claims settlement provisions to coincide with common law Stowers claims, thus avoiding potentially inconsistent duties.
Read the Texas Supreme Court’s majority opinion. -
In re Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., et al., No. 14-09-00086-CV, 2009 Tex. App. LEXIS 1234 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] February 24, 2009) (mem. op.)
WBC successfully challenged a trial court order severely restricting the scope of discovery necessary to defend against the opposing party's bad faith claims. The court of appeals granted mandamus relief and ordered the trial court to vacate the order.
- Hunt Construction Group, Inc. v. Konecny, No. 01-06-01155-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 9033 (Tex. App. —Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 4, 2008, no pet. hist.).
WBC represented the general contractor and subcontractors in an appeal from a jury verdict and judgment in favor of a plaintiff who collected workers' compensation insurance benefits following an injury on the jobsite. WBC obtained a reversal of the trial court's judgment and a rendition of judgment in our clients' favor on all claims.
- In re AIG Aviation (Texas), Inc., No. 04-08-00454-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 6915 (Tex. App.—San Antonio September, 10, 2008) (mem. op.).
WBC successfully challenged a trial court order, signed after judgment, awarding substantial litigation expenses to our client's opponent. The court of appeals granted mandamus relief and ordered the trial court to vacate the award.
-
MCI Sales & Service, Inc. v. Hinton, No. 10-06-00256-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 6951 (Tex. App.—Waco Sept. 10, 2008, n.p.h.).
WBC successfully represented a motor coach manufacturer in an appeal from a $17.5 million products-liability judgment arising from injuries incurred by several passengers in a highly publicized accident near Hewitt, Texas. The court of appeals agreed with us that the trial court committed harmful error by not allowing the jury to consider whether the driver of the bus and his employer were responsible for the accident. The court therefore reversed the judgment and remanded the case for a new trial. The chief justice wrote separately to express his agreement with WBC’s other argument that the plaintiffs’ defective-product claims were inconsistent with federal regulations governing bus manufacturers and, therefore, were pre-empted as a matter of law. The case is currently pending in the court of appeals on a motion for rehearing.
-
Pacha v. Casey, No. 14-07-00150-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 5490 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] July 22, 2008, no pet.)
WBC successfully represented a plaintiff in this appeal filed by a physician challenging the sufficiency of the plaintiff's expert reports and the trial court's decision not to dismiss the case. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's decision in our client's favor.
Read the opinion. - A&B Bolt & Supply, Inc. v. National Oilwell Varco, L.P., No. 01-07-01069-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 922 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 7, 2008, no pet.).
WBC represented the defendants in a bitter fight over “trade secrets” allegedly misappropriated by the plaintiff’s former employees and their new employer. WBC succeeded in obtaining the reversal of a temporary injunction against our clients. WBC’s attorneys then worked closely with trial lawyers from other firms on evidentiary issues, the jury charge, and other matters during a month-long trial. These efforts resulted in a complete defense verdict.
Read the opinion. - American Heritage, Inc. v. Nevada Gold & Casino, Inc., 259 S.W.3d 816 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2008, no pet.)
WBC represented Nevada Gold, which had obtained a judgment for over $8 million based on American Heritage’s breach of a casino operating contract. The court of appeals affirmed as to all of the contractual damages awarded by the jury.
Read the opinion. -
Tenneessee Gas Pipeline Co. v. Technip USA Corp., No. 01-06-00535-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 6419 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Aug. 21, 2008, n.p.h.).
WBC represented Technip USA and its parent corporation in this appeal. The jury awarded TGP over $18 million for delays and allegedly defective work arising from a construction project. The trial court eliminated most of the delay-related claims under a provision in the parties’ contract excluding indirect and consequential damages. The court of appeals largely affirmed the trial court’s judgment, agreeing with us that the majority of TGP’s claimed damages were not recoverable under the contract. The appellate court also eliminated TGP’s claimed damages for alleged defects for failure to provide notice of those claims as required under the contract and rejected TGP’s attempt to impose liability on Technip USA’s parent company. The appeal is currently pending on a motion for rehearing.
Read the opinion. -
Schott v. Knight, No. 01-06-00727-CV, 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 10072 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 20, 2007, no pet.)
WBC successfully represented the defendants in the plaintiff’s appeal from a judgment awarding her zero damages for past and future mental anguish she allegedly suffered from an automobile accident. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment.
Read the opinion. - Kipp v. Dyncorp Technical Services, LLC, No. 01-06-00906-CV, 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 8902 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Nov. 8, 2007, no pet.).
The court of appeals affirmed a no-evidence summary judgment in favor of WBC’s clients in a suit alleging premises liability.
Read the opinion. - Encompass Power Services, Inc. v. Engineering & Construction Co., No. 05-20987, 224 Fed. Appx. 329, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 6432 (5th Cir. Mar. 20, 2007).
WBC represented a general contractor seeking to join a responsible third-party subcontractor into an arbitration proceeding filed against the general contractor. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s order requiring the subcontractor to join in the arbitration.
Read the opinion. -
In re Gupta, 263 S.W.3d 184 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, orig. proceeding)
WBC represented a steel mill in response to a mandamus proceeding filed by a scrap metal dealer challenging “death penalty” sanctions imposed by the trial court against the dealer. The court of appeals denied the mandamus and refused to disturb the sanctions. One justice wrote a lengthy concurring opinion in support of our position that the sanctions were justified
Read the majority opinion.
Read the concurring opinion. - Coastal Refining & Marketing, Inc. v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co., 218 S.W.3d 279 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2007, pet. denied).
WBC represented Lexington Insurance Company in the appeal from a summary judgment in favor of USF&G in a coverage dispute. The trial court held that USF&G had no duty to indemnify for a settlement, based on USF&G’s allegations that Coastal, the insured, provided late notice, settled the underlying matter without consent, and failed to cooperate. The court of appeals reversed the judgment and remanded the cause for further proceedings. The Supreme Court denied our opponent’s petition for review.
Read the opinion. - Cross Creek Homes, Inc. v. First Continental Mortgage Co., No. 04-05-00727-CV, 2006 Tex. App. LEXIS 8942 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Oct. 18, 2006, no pet.).
WBC represented a lender in an appeal filed by a manufactured home seller from a summary judgment on the home seller’s claims of breach of contract, promissory estoppel, fraud, and conspiracy. The court of appeals affirmed the judgment in our client’s favor.
Read the opinion. - Ellwood Texas Forge Corp. v. Jones, 214 S.W.3d 693 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2007, pet. denied).
WBC represented a premises owner in an appeal from an adverse judgment in a case involving a worksite injury. The court of appeals held the premises owner owed no duty to the independent contractor’s employee because there was no evidence the owner retained control over the scope of work. The Texas Supreme Court denied the employee’s petition for review.
Read the opinion. - Williams v. LifeCare Hospitals of North Texas, 207 S.W.3d 828 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2006, no pet.).
WBC represented a hospital system in the plaintiffs’ appeal from a low-damages jury verdict. The court of appeals granted our motion to dismiss the appeal, on the grounds that, by accepting the benefits of the judgment (which the defendants had satisfied in full) the plaintiffs were estopped from pursuing an appeal.
Read the opinion. - Magana v. Hammer & Steel, No. 05-20337 (5th Cir. 2006).
WBC assisted trial counsel in preparing findings of fact and conclusions of law in this negligence and products-liability action arising from a worker’s fall. Our proposed findings were largely adopted by the district court in rendering a take-nothing judgment in favor of our client. WBC then handled the appeal before the Fifth Circuit, which affirmed the trial court’s judgment just two days after oral argument.
Read the opinion. -
Argovitz v. Argovitz, No. 14-04-00885-CV, 2005 Tex. App. LEXIS 8795 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 25, 2005, pet. denied).
WBC successfully obtained a dismissal of the appeal from the trial court’s judgment in our client’s favor in a divorce proceeding, based on our opponent’s voluntary acceptance of certain benefits from that judgment.
Read the opinion. - Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania v. Pearson, No. 07-03-00340-CV, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 8155 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Sept. 7, 2004, no pet.).
WBC obtained reversal of a $1 million judgment against our client in a dispute over coverage under a Texas commercial auto policy. The court of appeals agreed with our interpretation of the relevant policy language and held that there was no coverage for injuries that occurred after the driver exited the vehicle.
Read the opinion. - Wilson v. K.W.G., Inc., No. 11-03-00084-CV, 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 8019 (Tex. App.—Eastland Aug. 31, 2004, no pet.).
WBC represented a bar owner who had been sued for actual and exemplary damages by a patron who was assaulted by an intoxicated customer. The trial court granted our motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and disregarded the jury’s award of punitive damages. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling in our client’s favor.
Read the opinion. - American Home Assurance Company v. United Space Alliance, LLC, 378 F.3d 482 (5th Cir. 2004).
The court of appeals reversed the judgment against our client, American Home, for over $2 million in attorney’s fees and remanded the case for a new trial.
Read the opinion. -
Feldman/Matz Interests, L.L.P. v. Settlement Capitol Corp., 140 S.W.3d 879 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, orig. proceeding)
In this mandamus proceeding, WBC successfully argued that the Federal Arbitration Act did not authorize the trial court to conduct a hearing on a request for a temporary injunction before submitting the case to arbitration.
Read the majority opinion. - City of Galveston v. Garza, No. 10-01-00031-CV, 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 7255 (Tex. App.—Waco Aug. 20, 2003, pet. denied).
The court of appeals reversed a $10 million judgment against the City of Galveston and the Flagship Hotel in a case in which two adults drove off the pier at the hotel and drowned in the Gulf of Mexico. The Texas Supreme Court denied our opponents’ petition for review.
Read the opinion. - Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Aguilera-Sanchez, No. 04-02-00458-CV, 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 4846 (Tex. App.—San Antonio June 11, 2003, pet. denied).
WBC successfully represented Wal-Mart on appeal from a $20 million judgment for malicious prosecution in a mistaken identity case. The court of appeals reversed and rendered a take-nothing judgment, and the Texas Supreme Court denied the plaintiff’s petition for review.
Read the majority opinion. - Kings Park Apartments v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 101 S.W.3d 525 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, pet. denied).
WBC’s attorneys represented National Union in this contentious litigation that lasted for over eleven years and resulted in a bad faith verdict that the plaintiffs argued was worth $16 million. We convinced the trial judge to reduce the verdict to a $2.5 million judgment. The court of appeals then reversed and rendered judgment that the plaintiffs take nothing on their claims. The Texas Supreme Court denied the plaintiffs’ petition for review.
Read the opinion. - Texas Real Estate Holdings, Inc. v. Quach, 95 S.W.3d 395 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, pet. denied).
WBC represented Texas Real Estate Holdings in an appeal of a $1.1 million judgment rendered against the company in a premises liability case. The court of appeals reversed and rendered a take-nothing judgment, and the Texas Supreme Court denied our opponents’ petition for review.
Read the opinion. - In re American Home Assurance Co., 88 S.W.3d 370 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2002, orig. proceeding).
The Texarkana Court of Appeals held that the trial court’s discovery rulings against our client were an abuse of discretion. In addition to other significant rulings, this case is the first published opinion in Texas to hold that an insurance company’s “reserves” information, essentially an internal evaluation of the case, is not discoverable.
Read the opinion. - Lexington Insurance Co. v. Buckingham Gate, Ltd., 993 S.W.2d 185 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1999, pet. denied).
WBC founding partner Tom Wright represented Lexington following an adverse verdict of over $20 million based on alleged Insurance Code violations and misrepresentations. The trial court granted our post-verdict motion, in part, and rendered a judgment of $2 million against Lexington. The court of appeals reversed the entire judgment, ruling that the plaintiff should take nothing against Lexington, and the Texas Supreme Court denied our opponent’s petition for review.