The Dallas Court of Appeals recently held that a plaintiff cannot avoid attorney’s fees by simply dismissing its claim prior to a decision on the merits. In this case, the plaintiff asserted several claims against the defendant, including a claim for violation of the Texas Theft Liability Act (Theft Act). Four days after the defendant
Incremental Clarity for Supersedeas: Attorney’s Fees
Little by little, appellate practitioners are getting answers to the many questions emanating from the supersedeas statute and law that came about as part of tort reform in 2003. The Texas Supreme Court‘s opinion in In re Nalle Plastics Family Limited Partnership holds that attorney’s fees are not compensatory damages that must be superseded.
No Presentment, No Attorney’s Fees
The Dallas Court of Appeals reaffirmed the requirement that a claim be presented to the opposing party in order to recover attorney’s fees under Chapter 38 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Here, the party seeking fees argued that the offers exchanged at mediation constituted presentment for purposes of CPRC Section 38.002. The Court
Texas Supreme Court to decide whether attorney’s fees must be superseded pending appeal
The Texas Supreme Court recently set In Re Nalle Plastics Limited Partnership for oral argument indicating that it will decide whether attorney’s fees must be superseded pending appeal. The Court will resolve a split of authority that has developed in Texas courts of appeals as to whether attorney’s fees consitute "compensatory damages" under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 24.2 and
Attorneys’ fees must be reasonable under Rule 1.04
The Dallas Court of Appeals recently decided an interesting issue involving whether evidence that attorney’s fees are reasonable under the Arthur Anderson v. Perry factors is required in a breach of contract case between attorney and former client. Here, a law firm brought suit against its former client for non-payment of fees pursuant to a contract
Split of Authority Regarding Superseding Attorney’s Fees On Appeal
The Dallas Court of Appeals, in an opinion by Chief Justice Carolyn Wright (left), recently held that attorney’s fees awarded in a judgment need not be superseded on appeal. In an opinion last year also by Chief Justice Wright, the Dallas Court held that attorney’s fees awarded in a breach of contract case were not "compensatory damages," and
Fifth Circuit Exception to Locality Rule for Attorney’s Fees
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that when it becomes necessary to secure out-of-district counsel to adequately represent a civil rights plaintiff, the prevailing rates charged by that firm are the starting point for the lodestar calculation for an award of attorney’s fees. This ruling is an exception to the usual rule that
Attorney’s Fees Double Play
The San Antonio Court of Appeals recently decided two cases dealing with recovery of attorney’s fees for breach of contract. The court first held that a party who brings an action to enforce a Mediated Settlement Agreement (MSA) is not entitled to attorney’s fees under Chapter 38 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code
Non-suit precludes attorney’s fees award as prevailing party under agreement
The Austin Court of Appeals recently held that a plaintiff’s notice of non-suit precludes a defendant from recovering attorney’s fees as prevailing party under a written agreement. In this case, the plaintiffs bought a house from defendants under a standard-form sales contract promulgated by the Texas Real Estate Commission. Plaintiffs brought suit against defendants for failing to disclose
Superseding judgments: what damages must be superseded?
Supersedeas aficionados will want to take a look at the Austin Court of Appeals‘ opinion in Shook v. Walden. The opinion gives a very thorough treatment of the parties’ arguments and analysis of the law relating to elements of damages that must be superseded. To summarize, the court of appeals makes the following