April 29, 2015 in Case Summaries

Joined by appellate lawyer Carl Cecere and trial lawyer Steve Goldston, Jeff Levinger represented Inwood National Bank in its appeal of an adverse judgment in a complex, high-dollar garnishment proceeding. Although Inwood held a perfected security interest in a large investment account owned by one of its borrowers, the trial court concluded that Inwood’s security interest was subordinate to Wells Fargo’s later judgment lien against the same borrower. Addressing an issue of first impression in Texas concerning the meaning of UCC § 9.323(b), the Dallas Court of Appeals agreed with Inwood’s argument that it had taken no actions to compromise its prior, perfected security interest. Accordingly, the court dissolved Wells Fargo’s writ of garnishment and restored Inwood’s security interest in the investment account. Inwood National Bank v. Wells Fargo Bank, 463 S.W.3d 228 (Tex. App. ‑‑ Dallas 2015, no pet.).

Courts: Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter: Business Litigation

February 27, 2015 in Case Summaries

Just three weeks after hearing oral argument, the Dallas Court of Appeals reversed a trial court order appointing a receiver to liquidate valuable assets of a partnership jointly owned by Levinger PC client Steven Spiritas. The other owner, Susan Davidoff, had asked the trial court to order the receivership, claiming that a deadlock between herself and Spiritas required the partnership assets to be immediately sold. Spiritas secured a stay of the order, and then successfully argued to the court of appeals that the appointment of the receiver was not authorized under the Texas Business Organizations Code because there was no evidence that any irreparable injury was occurring or threatened. Spiritas v. Davidoff, 459 S.W.3d 224 (Tex. App. ‑‑ Dallas 2015, no pet.).

Courts: Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter: Business Litigation, Oil & Gas/Real Estate

June 25, 2014 in Case Summaries

After two appeals to the Dallas Court of Appeals, Levinger PC clients Hampden Corporation and Fantasy Diamond Corporation won the complete reversal of a $750,000 judgment against them for the alleged breach of a commission agreement with one of their sales representatives. The court of appeals held that the commission agreement was modified by an enforceable agreement to pay the sales representative on a monthly retainer basis, and that Hampden and Fantasy Diamond were entitled to terminate the modified agreement at any time. The opinion ended nearly seven years of litigation between the parties. Hampden Corp. v. Remark, Inc., No. 05‑13‑00529‑CV, 2014 WL 2921655 (Tex. App. ‑‑ Dallas June 25, 2014, pet. denied).

Courts: Texas intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter: Labor & Employment

January 13, 2014 in Case Summaries

Jeff Levinger represented long-time clients Jakalam Properties and Michael Cohen in persuading the Dallas Court of Appeals to affirm a favorable jury verdict based on the breach of an oral agreement.  The agreement arose out of a commitment on the part of an asbestos testing lab to reimburse Jakalam for the expenses it had to incur after the lab mistakenly reported that a building being renovated by Jakalam contained asbestos.  The Court rejected the lab’s contention that the oral contract was too indefinite to be enforced, holding that the contract was sufficiently definite to enable it to fix the parties’ obligations and liabilities.  The court also upheld the jury’s finding that the contract had been breached, and agreed that Jakalam was a prevailing party entitled to recover its attorney’s fees at trial and on appeal.  Crisp Analytical Lab, L.L.C. v. Jakalam Properties, Ltd., 422 S.W.3d 85 (Tex. App. ‑‑ Dallas 2013, pet. denied).

Courts:  Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter:  Business Litigation

April 5, 2013 in Case Summaries

Working with trial attorneys Kenneth Chaiken and Robert Chaiken, Jeff Levinger persuaded the Dallas Court of Appeals to reverse the trial court’s dismissal of a medical malpractice lawsuit brought by their clients, Ronald and Pam Fortner.  Mr. Fortner became totally and permanently blind in the days following a cardiac bypass procedure, when his physicians and nurses failed to timely obtain appropriate treatment and consultations after he began complaining about visual problems.  The trial court dismissed the case on the ground that the expert reports did not adequately explain the element of causation, but after reading the Fortners’ brief and hearing oral argument, the court of appeals held that the trial court had abused its discretion and remanded the case for further proceedings.  Fortner v. Hospital of the Southwest, et al., 399 S.W.3d 373 (Tex. App. ‑‑ Dallas 2013, no pet.).

Courts:  Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter:  Products Liability & Personal Injury