The Texas Supreme Court handed down six decisions with this week’s orders. In Mid-Century Insurance Co. v. Ademaj (No. 05-0016), a declaratory judgment action, the Court held that insurers may lawfully collect Texas Automobile Theft Prevention Authority fees from auto insurance policyholders without including such fees in rate filings required under Article 5.101 of the… Continue Reading
In this post, I asked how "tort reformers" are responding to the Baylor Law Review-sponsored survey of Texas judges, which has been championed as helping to "clear the air" about the state of our court system. In a commentary recently published in the San Antonio Express-News, Austin lawyer Lee Parsley does just that. In addition,… Continue Reading
The ABA Journal has released its first "Blawg 100" list, described here as "the 100 best Web sites by lawyers, for lawyers, as chosen by the editors . . . ." The honorees tend to be news-oriented or big-picture blogs—very few state-specific blogs made the list. That’s not terribly surprising, considering the source. The State… Continue Reading
I spoke at the Austin Bar Association’s monthly members-only CLE luncheon this past Friday. My topic was "Texas Supreme Court Update: Developments Since Summer Recess." With permission, I used a paper Dylan Drummond wrote and added other recent developments by inserting relevant posts from this blog at the end. If anyone is interested, a copy… Continue Reading
For the second week in a row, the Texas Supreme Court has issued no opinions with its weekly orders. Happy Thanksgiving!
The Baylor Law Review-sponsored survey of Texas judges regarding the need for tort reform (previously discussed here) received further press this week. In a San Antonio Express-News guest column, Houston lawyers Peter Kelly and Jeffery Nobles discussed the survey and described it as "an important step in clearing the air about the court system." Kelly… Continue Reading
The Texas Supreme Court issued no opinions with today’s orders.
Today’s post at the Illinois Trial Practice Weblog contains a useful tip that’s worth a mention here: Never read your argument when appearing before an appellate court. Not only is it bad form, but it also hinders your ability to respond to questions or address the points your opponent makes. The post lays out an… Continue Reading
The U.S. Supreme Court heard argument in a particularly interesting and (I think) important case today. In Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc. (06-989), the Court will decide whether contracting parties may agree to expand the grounds for vacating arbitration awards beyond those recognized under the Federal Arbitration Act. The Fifth Circuit and others… Continue Reading
In Charles v. Grief (No. 07-50537), the Fifth Circuit has affirmed the district court’s denial of a state official’s motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity because the official’s immunity turned on fact issues. What is remarkable about this decision is the following section from the circuit court’s opinion, which is worth quoting in… Continue Reading
As promised, here are some very brief summaries of the latest Texas Supreme Court opinions. In In re Pirelli Tire, L.L.C. (No. 04-1129) (orig. proceeding), a case brought by non-U.S. residents, the Court held that the trial court abused its discretion by denying a motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens. The Court relied… Continue Reading
The Texas Supreme Court issued six opinions with today’s orders. Unfortunately, I will not be able to study them until the weekend, but will post my usual short summaries as soon as I can.
The Summer 2007 issue of The Appellate Advocate is now available through the State Bar Appellate Section’s web site. As usual, the publication is packed with interesting articles and useful case updates. Give it a read!
In Vaughn v. American Honda Motor Co. (No. 07-41056), the Fifth Circuit has held that the district court’s decision to require any objector to a class action settlement to post a $150,000 bond for costs on appeal was an abuse of discretion. Concluding that the district court could not use FRAPs 7 and 38 to… Continue Reading