In its recent opinion in Perkins v. City of San Antonio, the San Antonio Court of Appeals stated "we disapprove of our conclusion in Wu [v. City of San Antonio], regarding the applicable standard for reviewing the Board’s orders." (emphasis added). By way of background Wu adopted a hybrid standard of review for
Opinions & Judgments
Remember That If You Move For Traditional Summary Judgment, You Will Want To Attach Evidence To Support Your Arguments
By David Oliveros on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
How effective is a motion for summary judgment that has no evidence attached to it? Not very. Sometimes you can dodge a few bullets. Ultimately, you will get hit. That’s what happened in the Dallas Court of Appeals’ opinion in American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Inc. v. Yoonessi.
The American Board of…
Late Notice of the Judgment
By Mike Northrup on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
When a party (or the party’s attorney) does not receive actual notice of an adverse judgment within 90 days of that judgment, the party may make use of Texas Civil Procedure Rule 306a to extend deadlines for filing a motion for new trial or to appeal. But its important that the party invoking Rule 306a…
Mandamus and Supersedeas
By Mike Northrup on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
The San Antonio Court of Appeals has issued an interesting opinion in a mandamus proceeding involving what is described as an unsuperseded judgment. In In re Romero, Gonzalez & Benavides, L.L.P., there was a dispute between the law firm of Romero, Gonzalez & Benavides (RG&B) and attorney Mark Cantu regarding the right to a…
Implied Promise by Employer Validates Non-Compete
By Byron Henry on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
The Texas Supreme Court recently weighed in again on the enforceability of non-compete agreements under Texas law. Specifically, the Court held that an employer need not expressly promise to provide confidential information to an employee in return for a promise not to disclose the information. Instead, the Court held that an employer impliedly promises to provide confidential information…
Texas Open Meetings Act vs. the First Amendment Rights of Elected Officials
By Mike Northrup on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
This entry comes to us courtesy of Sim Israeloff.
Many elected officials in Texas, including most who are elected to city councils and school boards, serve as citizen volunteers without pay. Newly elected officials are sometimes surprised to find that their actions and speech are now restricted by statutes such as the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA). The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has now weighed in on whether elected officials carrying out their official duties retain the same First Amendment protections on speech as private citizens.
Continue Reading Texas Open Meetings Act vs. the First Amendment Rights of Elected Officials
Personal Jurisdiction and the Fidiciary Shield Doctrine
By Mike Northrup on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
The Dallas Court of Appeals has added another opinion to the stack of authority recognizing and applying the corporate fiduciary shield doctrine. In Nichols v. Lin, Nichols brought suit for breach of contract against Tseng Lin, YJ USA, and others. Nichols sought to hold Lin responsible for the breach on a theory of alter…
Written opinions — How “brief” is practicable but still addresses every issue raised and necessary?
By Mike Northrup on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
‘written opinion’ ‘Rule 47’…
Continue Reading Written opinions — How “brief” is practicable but still addresses every issue raised and necessary?
Challenging an Order on a Contest to an Affidavit of Indigency
By Mike Northrup on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
Must an appellant who seeks to appeal a trial court’s order sustaining a challenge to the appellant’s affidavit of indigency file a separate notice of appeal? Answer: It depends on which court of appeals the appeal is in.
The San Antonio Court of Appeals has held that it is not necessary for an appellant to…
Statutory Construction and Legislative Resolutions
By Mike Northrup on
Posted in Opinions & Judgments
All those "whereas" clauses in congressional resolutions amount to nothing, according to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In 1993, the U.S. Congress passed a joint resolution expressing its deep regret to native Hawaiians insofar as the United States’ overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii. Contained within the resolution was an apology to the Hawaiian people, which acknowledged…