Supreme Court of Texas
Dallas Court of Appeals Affirms Jury Finding that Goodyear Was Grossly Negligent in Exposing Deceased Tire Builder to Asbestos
September 13, 2017 in Case Summaries
Working closely with trial lawyer Chris Panatier, Jeff Levinger convinced the Dallas Court of Appeals to affirm a jury’s finding that the gross negligence of Goodyear at its tire manufacturing facility in Tyler caused its employee Carl Rogers to be exposed to significant amounts of asbestos, which resulted in his death from mesothelioma. Based on extensive expert testimony and historical data concerning the dangers of asbestos, the court of appeals upheld the jury’s finding that Goodyear’s conduct—especially its failure to monitor its employees’ exposure to asbestos for over ten years—involved an extreme degree of risk, and that Goodyear had subjective awareness of that risk but proceeded with conscious indifference to the safety of its employees. The court also rejected Goodyear’s argument that Rogers had not established causation by adequately ruling out the radiation that was used to successfully treat a previous bout with lung cancer. Finally, over a dissent by Justice Ada Brown, the majority suggested a remittitur of the damages awarded under the exemplary-damages cap statute based on its determination that the evidence did not support the entirety of the award for past and future economic damages. The Texas Supreme Court denied Goodyear’s petition for review after full briefing on the merits. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Rogers, 538 S.W.3d 637 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2017, pet. denied).
Courts: Supreme Court of Texas, Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter: Products Liability & Personal Injury, Labor & Employment
Judgment Against General Contractor Is Reversed Based On Erroneous Jury Charge Submission
Judgment Against General Contractor Is Reversed Based On Erroneous Jury Charge Submission
October 27, 2016 in Case Summaries
Led by the advocacy of Carl Cecere, Levinger PC persuaded the Dallas Court of Appeals to reverse a judgment of nearly $1.5 million against general contractor Viking Healthcare in favor of Zeig Electric, a subcontractor, in connection with the construction of a specialty hospital in Sherman, Texas. The appellate court determined that no evidence supported the liability question submitted to the jury, which asked whether Viking and a project manager that was not a party to the subcontract “failed to comply with the Agreement” with Zeig. Despite the absence of evidence, the court remanded the case for a new trial “in the interest of justice.” The Supreme Court denied review after requesting briefing on both Zeig’s petition and its motion for rehearing. Viking Healthcare, LLC v. Zeig Electric, Inc., No. 05‑15‑00835‑CV, 2016 WL 7448335 (Tex. App. — Dallas Oct. 27, 2016, pet. denied) (mem. op.).
Courts: Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts, Supreme Court of Texas
Subject Matter: Business Litigation, Procedural & Evidentiary Issues
Court of Appeals Tosses Developer’s $9 Million Inverse Condemnation Award Against City of McKinney
Court of Appeals Tosses Developer’s $9 Million Inverse Condemnation Award Against City of McKinney
May 3, 2016 in Case Summaries
Jeff Levinger successfully represented the City of McKinney in its appeal of a judgment of over $9,000,000 stemming from a developer’s claim that the City had committed an “inverse condemnation” by violating a restriction in a deed. In its 2009 lawsuit, Eldorado Land Company contended that the City’s construction of a library on a portion of a 32 acre tract that Eldorado had conveyed to the City for use as a community park violated the deed restriction, which provided that the property could be used only as a “park and recreational facility.” The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of El Dorado on the liability issue, and a jury assessed damages of over $7,500,000 (exclusive of interest), representing the difference in the property’s value with and without its deed and zoning restrictions. In reversing the summary judgment on liability and rendering a take-nothing in favor of the City, the Court of Appeals held that the City’s community library fit squarely within the “plain, ordinary, and generally accepted meaning” of a park and recreational facility, and thus did not violate the restriction in the deed. City of McKinney v. Eldorado Land Co., LP, No. 05-15-00067-CV, 2016 WL 2349371 (Tex. App.-Dallas May 3, 2016, pet. denied).
Courts:Supreme Court of Texas, Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter: Business Litigation, Oil & Gas/Real Estate
Texas Supreme Court Finds Sufficient Evidence of Negligence But Remands for New Trial in Brake-Failure Case
Texas Supreme Court Finds Sufficient Evidence of Negligence But Remands for New Trial in Brake-Failure Case
August 31, 2012 in Case Summaries
Jeff Levinger was retained to prepare the response brief on the merits on behalf of Talmadge Waldrip, who was catastrophically injured when a 26-foot U-Haul rental truck rolled over him after its parking brake failed. The Supreme Court found that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s findings of negligence on the part of both U-Haul International and U-Haul of Texas. Nevertheless, it remanded the case for a new trial based on the admission of evidence that other U-Haul trucks in Canada had experienced mechanical failures. Over the dissent of Justice Lehrmann, the Court held that the evidence of the Canadian defects was not sufficiently similar to the defect in the truck at issue, and that the admission of the evidence was harmful. U-Haul Intern. Inc. v. Waldrip, 380 S.W.3d 118 (Tex. 2012).
Courts: Supreme Court of Texas
Subject Matter: Products Liability & Personal Injury
Multi-Million Dollar Judgment for Breach of Fiduciary Duty Reversed Based on Contractual Disclaimer.
Multi-Million Dollar Judgment for Breach of Fiduciary Duty Reversed Based on Contractual Disclaimer.
January 12, 2012 in Case Summaries
In a complex partnership dispute that culminated in a multi-million dollar jury verdict, Jeff Levinger persuaded the Houston First Court of Appeals to reverse the judgment against his client, Douglas Strebel. Strebel’s former partner, John Wimberly, had obtained a $3.4 million judgment based on the jury’s findings that Strebel had breached alleged fiduciary duties as both the controlling member of a Delaware LLC and the limited partner of a Texas LP. The court of appeals reversed, holding that Wimberly’s alleged loss of distributions occurred only at the LP level where the parties had contractually disclaimed any fiduciary duties on the part of the general partner and the controlling member of the general partner. Strebel v. Wimberly, 371 S.W.3d 267 (Tex. App. ‑‑ Houston [1st Dist.] 2012, pet. denied).
Courts: Supreme Court of Texas, Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter: Business Litigation