Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Dallas Court of Appeals Affirms Trial Court’s Refusal to Modify Parent-Child Relationship
March 2, 2022 in Case Summaries
In a long-running and procedurally-complex child custody dispute between two physicians, Levinger PC successfully represented the father in persuading the Dallas Court of Appeals to uphold the trial court’s order refusing to modify the parent-child relationship. The Court first rejected the mother’s contention that the parties had not agreed to arbitrate their dispute, holding that a 2010 order included a consensual arbitration clause and a 2012 order did not revoke that agreement. The Court also rejected the mother’s procedural challenges to the award, including her attack on the arbitrator’s decision concerning her effort to present testimony from out-of-state witnesses. In the Interest of K.B., No. 05-20-00123-CV, 2022 WL 611208 (Tex. App.—Dallas Mar. 2, 2022, no pet.) (mem. op.).
Courts: Texas Intermediate Courts
Subject Matter: Procedural & Evidentiary Issues
Dallas Court of Appeals Reverses $18 Million Judgment Against Levinger PC Client in Partnership Dispute
May 3, 2022 in Case Summaries
Jeff Levinger teamed with Locke Lord partners David Swanson and Tom Loose to obtain the reversal of a judgment of over $18 million in a long-running partnership dispute between their client, Craig Power, and his brother and business partner, Braden Power. In an opinion authored by Justice Erin Nowell and joined by Justices Ken Molberg and Bonnie Goldstein, the Dallas Court of Appeals held that the trial court had abused its discretion in admitting evidence of document spoliation and instructing the jury on spoliation without the requisite findings of duty and intent. And because the harm from the erroneous admission of the evidence and the spoliation instruction was “substantial,” the Court remanded the case for a new trial on all issues. After Levinger filed a petition for review in the Texas Supreme Court challenging the court of appeals’ failure to address several rendition issues, the case settled on terms favorable to Craig Power. Power v. Power, No. 05-19-01557-CV, 2022 WL 1314944 (Tex. App.—Dallas May 3, 2022, pet. dism’d by agr.) (mem. op).
Courts: Texas Intermediate Courts; Texas Supreme Court
Subject Matter: Business Litigation; Procedural and Evidentiary Issues
Dallas Court of Appeals Affirms $25 Million Judgment in Favor of Levinger PC Client Injured as a Result of Defective Seat Belt System
November 21, 2021 in Case Summaries
Sarah Milburn obtained a $25 million judgment following a Dallas County jury’s verdict that a defective seat belt system in a Honda Odyssey in which she was riding as an Uber passenger rendered her a quadriplegic in a side-impact collision. Working with trial lawyers Charla Aldous, Jim Mitchell, and Brent Walker, Jeff Levinger authored the appellate briefing and persuaded the Dallas Court of Appeals to affirm the judgment in. Reviewing an extensive record from the three-week trial, the court of appeals held that: (1) sufficient evidence supported the jury’s finding that Sarah had rebutted the statutory presumption of non-liability in Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 82.008; (2) Sarah’s human factors expert was qualified and provided sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding of a design defect; (3) the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s findings that a safer alternative design for the seat belt system existed; (4) Honda’s negligence in designing the seat belt system was the proximate cause of Sarah’s injuries; and (5) the trial court correctly refused to submit a proportionate responsibility question that included Uber. The Texas Supreme Court has granted review and heard oral argument in September 2023. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. v. Milburn, 668 S.W.3d 6 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2021, pet. granted).
Courts: Texas Intermediate Courts; Texas Supreme Court
Subject Matter: Products Liability & Personal Injury
Texarkana Court of Appeals Rebuffs Employer’s Effort to Vacate Injured Worker’s $1 Million Arbitration Award
January 7,2021 in Case Summaries
Jeff Levinger authored the appellee’s brief that preserved an arbitration award of nearly $1 million in favor of Arnold & Itkin client Joseph Julian. After sustaining a serious workplace injury, Julian sued his employer, Load Trail LLC, a nonsubscriber to the Workers’ Compensation Act. Load Trail demanded arbitration, and following a three-day evidentiary hearing, the arbitrator found that a Load Trail employee was negligent in operating a forklift that struck Julian, and that Julian was entitled to economic and noneconomic damages. On appeal, Load Trail argued that the award should be vacated based on the arbitrator’s “evident partiality,” which Load Trail claimed was shown by various comments and rulings the arbitrator made during the hearing. The Texarkana Court of Appeals rejected this challenge, first holding that Load Trail waived it by not voicing any objection during the hearing to what it perceived to be the arbitrator’s actual basis. And even if Load Trail had timely objected, the Court held that the arbitrator’s comments and rulings did not rise to the level of “evident partiality” under the governing legal standards. Instead, Load Trail’s claims of evident partiality amounted to complaints about the merits, which the Court refused to second guess. Load Trail LLC v. Julian, No. 06-19-00099-CV, 2021 WL 55642 (Tex. App.—Texarkana Jan. 7, 2021, no pet. h.).
Courts: Texas Intermediate Courts
Subject Matter: Products Liability and Personal Injury
Oil and Gas Producer Obtains Mandamus Relief in Venue Dispute With Royalty Owner
October 7, 2020 in Case Summaries
Levinger PC persuaded the Dallas Court of Appeals to grant the petition for writ of mandamus filed by its client, Equinor Texas Onshore Properties, in a venue dispute with a royalty interest owner that the Court described as “unique” and “complex.” The royalty owner originally filed separate suits in LaSalle County against Equinor and a previous lessor, Repsol Oil & Gas. After Repsol agreed to transfer venue of its case to Dallas County, the royalty owner joined Equinor and persuaded the trial court to deny Equinor’s plea in abatement in favor of the still-pending LaSalle County suits. The Dallas Court of Appeals granted mandamus relief, holding that the LaSalle County court had dominant jurisdiction and that the Dallas County suit against Repsol did not “relate back” to the transferred suit so as to make it the “first-filed” suit. In re Equinor Texas Onshore Properties, No. 05-20-00578-CV, 2020 WL 5939034 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 7, 2020, pet. denied) (mem. op.).
Courts: Texas Intermediate Courts; Texas Supreme Court
Subject Matter: Oil & Gas/Real Estate; Procedural & Evidentiary Issues