Take-Nothing Judgment Affirmed Based on Res Judicata

Take-Nothing Judgment Affirmed Based on Res Judicata

April 21, 2006 in Case Summaries

Jeff Levinger represented Michael Cohen in the appeal of a take-nothing judgment in his favor based on res judicata.  The Dallas Court of Appeals affirmed.  Frazin v. Cohen, No. 05-03-01706-CV (Tex. App.  – Dallas 2005, pet. denied) (unpublished opinion).

Courts: Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter: Procedural & Evidentiary Issues
By | April 21st, 2006|Comments Off on Take-Nothing Judgment Affirmed Based on Res Judicata

Texas Supreme Court Grants Review of Consumer Class Action

Texas Supreme Court Grants Review of Consumer Class Action

February 16, 2005 in Case Summaries

Jeff Levinger represented AT&T in seeking review of the court of appeals’ determination that the Federal Communications Act does not preempt a consumer class action alleging fraud and breach of contract.  The Texas Supreme Court granted the petition for review, and the case settled before oral argument.  Bryceland v. AT&T Wireless, No. 03-0948 (Tex. 2005).

Courts: Supreme Court of Texas
Subject Matter: Business Litigation, Procedural & Evidentiary Issues, Securities Matters & Fraud
By | February 16th, 2005|Comments Off on Texas Supreme Court Grants Review of Consumer Class Action

Jeff Levinger Authors a Paper on Punitive Damages that is Presented at the 18th Annual Advanced Civil Appellate Practice Course

Jeff Levinger Authors a Paper on Punitive Damages that is Presented at the 18th Annual Advanced Civil Appellate Practice Course

September 10, 2004 in Speeches
In a comprehensive article entitled “Pondering Punitives:  Issues Arising at Trial and on Appeal,” Jeff Levinger examines the variety of statutory, common law, and constitutional issues that arise in obtaining or defeating, upholding or overturning punitive damage awards in Texas.

Subject Matter: Procedural & Evidentiary Issues
By | September 10th, 2004|Comments Off on Jeff Levinger Authors a Paper on Punitive Damages that is Presented at the 18th Annual Advanced Civil Appellate Practice Course

Court Affirms Limitations Bar Against Legal Malpractice Claims

Court Affirms Limitations Bar Against Legal Malpractice Claims

May 28, 2004 in Case Summaries
Jeff Levinger represented a law firm in the appeal of a summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s legal malpractice claims based on the statute of limitations.  The Dallas Court of Appeals affirmed, but the Texas Supreme Court reversed and remanded based on an intervening opinion in an unrelated case.  The Dallas Court of Appeals affirmed again on remand. Parsons v. Windle Turley. P.C., 50 S.W. 3d (Tex. App. – Dallas 2000), aff’d on remand, 109 S.W. 3d 804 (Tex. App. – Dallas 2003, pet. denied).

Courts: Supreme Court of Texas, Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter: Ethics & Professional Malpractice, Procedural & Evidentiary Issues
By | May 28th, 2004|Comments Off on Court Affirms Limitations Bar Against Legal Malpractice Claims

Mandamus Granted to Stay Wrongful Death Suit

Mandamus Granted to Stay Wrongful Death Suit

May 29, 2003 in Case Summaries
Jeff Levinger represented Tyler Asphalt in a mandamus proceeding to abate a wrongful death action pending the completion of a workers’ compensation appeal involving a deceased employee.  The Houston Court of Appeals granted the petition for writ of mandamus and abated the underlying case.  In re Tyler Asphalt Co., 107 S.W.3d 832 (Tex. App. — Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, orig. proceeding).

Courts: Texas Intermediate Appellate Courts
Subject Matter: Procedural & Evidentiary Issues, Products Liability & Personal Injury
By | May 29th, 2003|Comments Off on Mandamus Granted to Stay Wrongful Death Suit