Board Certified Civil Appellate Law Texas Board of Legal Specialization

Levinger Argues Texas Supreme Court Trilogy in 2013

Levinger Argues Texas Supreme Court Trilogy in 2013

October 8, 2013 in News
On October 8, 2013, Jeff Levinger completed an unusual trifecta of arguing three different cases before the Texas Supreme Court in a span of less than eight months.  The October case is styled LAN/STV v. Martin K. Eby Construction Co., No. 11-0810, and presents the issue whether the economic loss rule affects a general contractor’s right to bring a negligent misrepresentation claim against an architect and engineer for providing inaccurate information on which the contractor relied in preparing its bid.  Levinger argued the second case on September 9, 2013; it is styled Kia Motors Corp. v. Ruiz, No. 11-0709, and presents several evidentiary issues in a products liability case involving a frontal airbag that failed to deploy in a head-on collision.  The first case, Ritchie v. Rupe, No. 11-0447, was argued on February 26, 2013 and presents questions regarding the scope of and remedies for the claim of minority shareholder oppression in Texas.  Click here to read the transcript from the oral argument in the Rupe case, Click here to read the transcript from the oral argument in the Ruiz case, Click here to read the transcript from the oral argument in the Eby case.

Subject Matter:  Business Litigation, Products Liability and Personal Injury, Procedural and Evidentiary Issues.

By | October 8th, 2013|Comments Off on Levinger Argues Texas Supreme Court Trilogy in 2013
Read More

Fifth Circuit Breathes New Life Into € 136 Million Fraudulent Transfer Action Brought by Bankruptcy Litigation Trustee.

Fifth Circuit Breathes New Life Into € 136 Million Fraudulent Transfer Action Brought by Bankruptcy Litigation Trustee.

March 20, 2012 in Case Summaries

Jeff Levinger was retained to appeal a federal district court’s dismissal of a € 136 million fraudulent transfer action brought by MC Asset Recovery, a bankruptcy litigation trustee of Mirant Corporation, against a group of European lenders.  The district court had dismissed the case after deciding that the applicable fraudulent transfer law was supplied by Georgia, which did not allow for the avoidance of the guaranty transaction at issue.  On appeal, Levinger persuaded the Fifth Circuit that controlling choice-of-law principles required the application of New York law rather than Georgia law.  The Court also rejected the lenders’ argument that MC Asset Recovery lacked standing to sue because the creditors of Mirant purportedly had been paid in full.  Based on these rulings, the Fifth Circuit remanded the case to be decided on the merits under the New York fraudulent transfer statute.  MC Asset Recovery LLC v. Commerzbank A.G., 675 F.3d 530 (5th Cir. 2012).

Courts:  Federal Courts of Appeals
Subject Matter:  Procedural and Evidentiary Issues; Bankruptcy

By | March 20th, 2012|Comments Off on Fifth Circuit Breathes New Life Into € 136 Million Fraudulent Transfer Action Brought by Bankruptcy Litigation Trustee.
Read More

Dallas Court of Appeals Rules Again for DART Contractor, Supreme Court Applies Economic Loss Rule

Dallas Court of Appeals Rules Again for DART Contractor in Dispute Against Architect

August 29, 2011 in Case Summaries

In a second appeal involving the same lawsuit, Jeff Levinger again successfully represented Martin K. Eby Construction Company in its negligent misrepresentation suit against LAN/STV, an architect and engineer that prepared faulty construction plans and drawings for an extension of the DART rail project.  Following the remand in the first appeal, Eby settled its administrative claim against DART for $4.7  million and proceeded to trial against LAN/STV.  The jury found that LAN/STV had committed negligent misrepresentations that caused Eby $5 million in damages, but the trial court reduced the award to $2,250,000 plus interest based on the jury’s additional finding that LAN/STV was 45% responsible.  On appeal, the Dallas Court of Appeals rejected LAN/STV’s arguments regarding the derivative governmental immunity statute, the economic loss doctrine, the evidence of negligent misrepresentations, and the effect of the DART settlement.  The Texas Supreme Court subsequently reversed, holding that the economic loss rule restricted Eby to a breach of contact claim against DART.  Martin K. Eby Construction Co. v. LAN/STV, 350 S.W. 3d 675 (Tex. App. — Dallas Aug. 29, 2011), rev’d, 435 S.W. 30 234(Tex.2014).

Courts: Supreme Court of Texas,  Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter: Business Litigation, Procedural & Evidentiary Issues

By | August 29th, 2011|Comments Off on Dallas Court of Appeals Rules Again for DART Contractor, Supreme Court Applies Economic Loss Rule
Read More

Jeff Levinger Participates in Webcast on the New Proximate Cause Standard in the Pattern Jury Charges

Jeff Levinger Participates in Webcast on the New Proximate Cause Standard in the Pattern Jury Charges

April 20, 2011 in Speeches
Along with four other Texas practitioners and one Texas state judge, Jeff Levinger participated in a live webcast sponsored by the State Bar of Texas that focused on the new proximate cause standard in the 2010 editions of the Civil Pattern Jury Charges.  The webcast, entitled “Proximate Cause Redefined:  The Controversy Over Substantial Factor,” discussed the extensive debate and deliberations among the PJC committees over the proximate cause definition, provided an inside look into how the change was decided upon, and analyzed how that change may affect the bench and bar.  As chairman of the PJC volume on Malpractice, Premises, and Products, Levinger was intimately involved in the discussion, debate, and decision about the proximate cause definition.

Subject Matter: Procedural & Evidentiary Issues, Products Liability & Personal Injury
By | April 20th, 2011|Comments Off on Jeff Levinger Participates in Webcast on the New Proximate Cause Standard in the Pattern Jury Charges
Read More

Breach of Contract Judgment Reversed and Vacated on Appeal

Breach of Contract Judgment Reversed and Vacated on Appeal

December 21, 2010 in Case Summaries

Jeff Levinger represented defendants Hampden Corporation and Fantasy Diamond Corporation in an appeal of a judgment after a bench trial awarding the plaintiff over $750,000 in damages for breach of a commission agreement. Following oral argument, the Dallas Court of Appeals held that the trial court abused its discretion by concluding that the parties tried the breach of contract action by consent and by granting the plaintiff leave to file an amended petition after the trial to assert that cause of action. The court thus vacated the judgment in its entirety and remanded the case to the trial court to allow it to consider the evidence at trial in light of the claims pleaded in the plaintiff’s earlier-filed petition. Hampden Corp. v. Remark, Inc., 331 S.W.3d 489 (Tex. App.–Dallas 2010, pet. denied).

Courts: Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter: Labor & Employment, Procedural & Evidentiary Issues
By | December 21st, 2010|Comments Off on Breach of Contract Judgment Reversed and Vacated on Appeal
Read More

SEARCH LEVINGER’S EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE