As we reported last Friday, the Texas Supreme Court issued 13 new opinions on the last Friday of the Court's 2012-13 term. Below are summaries of seven of those opinions. Rich will do a post on the other six.
1. In re Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. -- Toyota filed this mandamus to challenge the merits of the trial court's reason for granting the plaintiffs' motion for new trial. The Court granted mandamus, holding that appellate courts can conduct a merits review of the specified basis for a new-trial order. Here, the reason given (that counsel argued outside the record) was an abuse of discretion because the record showed that counsel, in fact, argued record evidence. [Disclosure -- I am Toyota's lead appellate counsel in this case.]
2. Moncrief Oil Int'l Inc. v. OAO Gazprom Export, LLC -- The Court held that specific personal jurisdiction existed over two Russian companies that allegedly misappropriated trade secrets from a Texas company while at two meetings in Texas concerning a proposed Texas joint venture. But there was no jurisdiction over the defendants on a claim that they tortiously interfered with the Texas company's relationship with a California corporation regarding the proposed joint venture. The tortious interference allegedly occurred (1) at a meeting in California, and (2) through the defendant's establishment of a Texas enterprise to compete with the joint venture. Neither of those facts could support jurisdiction.
3. Elizondo v. Krist -- In this legal-malpractice case, the plaintiff sued his former lawyer, alleging that the lawyer settled the plaintiff's cases too cheaply. The Court affirmed the lower courts' rulings that an affidavit signed by the plaintiff's expert was conclusory because he failed to offer specifics to explain his perceived settlement value of the case.
4. Dugger v. Arredondo -- In this wrongful-death case, the defendant asserted the unlawful-act doctrine as a defense. This doctrine precludes recovery when the plaintiff was engaged in an unlawful act at the time of the injury. The Court held that the unlawful-acts doctrine cannot coexist with the proportionate-responsibility statute. Thus, the plaintiff's illegal conduct must be apportioned under chapter 33.
5. Texas Adjutant General's Office v. Ngakoue -- The Court held that under the Texas Tort Claims Act, a plaintiff who sues a state employee is not barred from asserting a claim against the governmental employer, which was the proper defendant.
6. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Adcock -- In 1997, the plaintiff recovered lifetime worker's comp benefits. In 2009, the insurer sought a new hearing, alleging that the disability was no longer permanent. The Court held that the worker's comp statute does not allow a reopening of the decision to award lifetime benefits.
7. Nathan v. Whittington -- Texas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act section 24.010 contains a four-year statute of repose that extinguishes the cause of action. Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 16.064 suspends the running of limitations for up to 60 days after the dismissal of a case for lack of jurisdiction. The Court held that section 16.064 applies only to a statute of limitations, and did not extend the repose period under section 24.010.
Click here to access the opinions.
-- Scott Stolley, Thompson & Knight
Comments