Board Certified Civil Appellate Law Texas Board of Legal Specialization

Levinger PC Represents Plaintiffs in Three of the Top 100 U.S. Jury Verdicts in 2017

Levinger PC Represents Plaintiffs in Three of the Top 100 U.S. Jury Verdicts in 2017

March 1, 2018 in News

Of the top 100 United States jury verdicts recently reported by ALM Media in its 2017 VerdictSearch, Levinger PC represents the Plaintiffs in the cases ranked 1st, 22nd, and 51st. Summaries of the three cases can be read here:

  1. Hopper v. JPMorgan Chase Bank: The adult children and second wife of a prominent information technology executive obtained a multi-billion dollar verdict of actual and punitive damages after a Dallas County probate court jury found that JPMorgan, the estate’s independent administrator, breached fiduciary duties and acted negligently by delaying the distribution of assets and spending the estate’s money on its own attorney’s fees. After being retained by the adult children to handle the post-verdict and appellate proceedings, Jeff Levinger initiated negotiations with JPMorgan and settled the claims for a confidential sum.
  2. Bagwell v. BBVA Compass: A residential property developer and his limited partnerships obtained a verdict in excess of $85 million after a Dallas County district court jury found that BBVA Compass defrauded him by failing to disclose that it had recently agreed to sell his partnerships’ loans to a competing developer, which then foreclosed on the properties and destroyed the developer’s livelihood. Levinger PC represented the developer in a previous appeal from a summary-judgment dismissal of the case, and assisted trial lawyer Derrick Boyd in the post-remand proceedings and at trial.
  3. Chohan, et al. v. New Prime, Inc.: Two families obtained a verdict of nearly $39 million after a Dallas County court at law jury found that a trucking company and its driver were negligent in causing a multi-vehicle crash on an icy road that led to deaths and multiple injuries. Both families retained Jeff Levinger to assist the trial lawyers, Micky Das and Tim Dollar, in connection with the post-verdict proceedings and appeal.

Subject Matter: Business Litigation; Procedural & Evidentiary Issues; Prudent Liability & Personal Injury

By | March 1st, 2018|Comments Off on Levinger PC Represents Plaintiffs in Three of the Top 100 U.S. Jury Verdicts in 2017
Read More

Dallas Court of Appeals Affirms $351 Million Judgment in Favor of Highland Capital Affiliate Against Credit Suisse

Dallas Court of Appeals Affirms $351 Million Judgment in Favor of Highland Capital Affiliate Against Credit Suisse.

February 20, 2018 in Case Summaries

Jeff Levinger assisted the trial team at Reid Collins & Tsai in securing the affirmance of a $351 million judgment in favor of an affiliate of Highland Capital Management against Credit Suisse. The judgment consisted of $211 million in actual damages and $140 million in pre- and post-judgment interest, and was based on fraud and breach of contract claims regarding an inflated appraisal that Credit Suisse used to induce the Highland affiliate to finance the Lake Las Vegas development. Applying New York law, which the parties had chosen to govern their relationship, the Dallas court of appeals rejected Credit Suisse’s argument that certain disclaimers in the loan documents protected it from liability for the falsified appraisal. The court also rejected Credit Suisse’s contention that a jury’s award of out-of-pocket damages for fraudulent inducement foreclosed the trial court from subsequently awarding rescissory damages in a bench trial on the remaining claims. Credit Suisse AG, Cayman Islands Branch v. Claymore Holdings, LLC, 2018 WL 947902 (Tex. App. ‑‑ Dallas Feb. 20, 2018, pet. filed) (mem. op.).

 

Courts: Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts

Subject Matter: Business Litigation, Oil & Gas/Real Estate

By | February 20th, 2018|Comments Off on Dallas Court of Appeals Affirms $351 Million Judgment in Favor of Highland Capital Affiliate Against Credit Suisse
Read More

Dallas Court of Appeals Reverses Trial Court’s Assertion of Personal Jurisdiction Over Mexican Reinsurance Broker

Dallas Court of Appeals Reverses Trial Court’s Assertion of Personal Jurisdiction Over Mexican Reinsurance Broker.

August 22, 2017 in Case Summaries

Levinger PC teamed with trial lawyer Thomas Cook of Zelle LLP to persuade the Dallas Court of Appeals to reverse the trial court’s assertion of personal jurisdiction over Cooper Gay Mexico, a reinsurance broker based in Mexico City. Elamex, S.A. de C.V., a Mexican food manufacturer with plants in Juarez and El Paso, had sought to hold Cooper Gay Mexico liable for more than $25 million as a result of an excess insurer’s refusal to pay Elamex for fire damages to its Juarez plant. After an extensive analysis of Cooper Gay Mexico’s efforts in seeking to obtain the excess insurance and in placing the reinsurance for the excess policy, the court of appeals concluded that Cooper Gay Mexico neither had any contacts with Texas nor sought any benefit by trying to avail itself of jurisdiction in Texas. Rather, the evidence showed that all of Cooper Gay Mexico’s relevant contacts were either with its affiliate in Florida or the excess insurer in Mexico. Cooper Gay Martinez del Rio y Asociados Intermediaros de Reaseguro S.A. de C.V. v. Elamex, S.A. de C.V., No. 05‑16‑01436‑CV, 2017 WL 359960 (Tex. App. ‑‑ Dallas Aug. 22, 2017, no pet.).

Courts: Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts

Subject Matter: Business Litigation, Procedural and Evidentiary Issues

By | August 22nd, 2017|Comments Off on Dallas Court of Appeals Reverses Trial Court’s Assertion of Personal Jurisdiction Over Mexican Reinsurance Broker
Read More

Fifth Circuit Vacates Entirety of Tax Court Ruling Against Owners of the Bosque Canyon Ranch in West Texas

Fifth Circuit Vacates Entirety of Tax Court Ruling Against Owners of the Bosque Canyon Ranch in West Texas

August 11, 2017 in Case Summaries

In a ruling that attracted national attention, a tax court in 2015 disallowed over $15 million in charitable contribution deductions taken by the owners of the 3700-acre Bosque Canyon Ranch. The tax court also imposed a 40 percent gross valuation misstatement penalty and held that the entirety of the limited partners’ contributions were made in exchange for “disguised sales” subject to taxation as ordinary income. The owners appealed, and Levinger PC successfully convinced the Fifth Circuit to vacate all of these tax court rulings. First, over the dissent of Judge Dennis, Judges Wiener and Haynes held that the owners’ donation of conservation easements satisfied the “perpetuity” requirement of IRC section 170, notwithstanding the reserved right to modify the boundaries of homesite parcels within the easements. Second, the panel unanimously held that the tax court clearly erred in finding the “baseline documentation” relating to the easements to be inadequate. Third, the panel vacated the gross valuation misstatement penalty because the tax court’s disallowance of the deduction was not based on the easements’ values. And fourth, the panel rejected the tax court’s determination that the entirety of the partners’ contributions were made in exchange for “disguised sales” of partnership property. The Fifth Circuit remanded the case to the tax court to consider certain issues raised by the IRS but not decided in the first proceeding. Bosque Canyon Ranch v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 867 F.3d 547 (5th Cir. 2017).

Courts: Federal Courts of Appeals
Subject Matter: Business Litigation, Oil & Gas/Real Estate

By | August 11th, 2017|Comments Off on Fifth Circuit Vacates Entirety of Tax Court Ruling Against Owners of the Bosque Canyon Ranch in West Texas
Read More

Fifth Circuit Upholds Jury’s Vindication of Dillon Gage in Fraudulent Transfer Suit Bought by Stanford Receiver

Fifth Circuit Upholds Jury’s Vindication of Dillon Gage in Fraudulent Transfer Suit

Bought by Stanford Receiver

May 5, 2017 in Case Summaries

In a published opinion addressing numerous aspects of the Texas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, the Fifth Circuit upheld a July 2015 jury verdict in favor of Levinger PC client Dillon Gage Incorporated of Dallas in a long-running dispute with Ralph Janvey, the court-appointed receiver in the Stanford Ponzi scheme litigation.  The Court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s finding that Stanford Coins & Bullion did not have an intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors when it made six payments totaling $5.1 million to Dillon Gage, a coin and bullion wholesaler, in the weeks leading up to the receivership.  In particular, the Court emphasized evidence showing that SCB intended to satisfy its obligations to all of its retail customers, as well as the Receiver’s failure to establish that SCB was insolvent at the time of the transfers.  Finally, the Court rejected the Receiver’s complaints about four aspects of the jury charge, including an instruction that a fraudulent intent cannot be inferred from a debtor’s mere intent to prefer one creditor over another.  Janvey v. Dillon Gage Incorporated of Dallas, 856 F.3d 377 (5th Cir. 2017).

Courts: Federal Courts of Appeals
Subject Matter: Business Litigation, Procedural & Evidentiary Issues

By | May 5th, 2017|Comments Off on Fifth Circuit Upholds Jury’s Vindication of Dillon Gage in Fraudulent Transfer Suit Bought by Stanford Receiver
Read More

SEARCH LEVINGER’S EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE