1233 West Loop South, Suite 1000Houston, TX 77027
Ph: (713) 654-1111 Fx: (713) 650-0027
8275 S. Eastern Avenue, Suite 200
Las Vegas, Nevada 89123
Ph: (702) 990-8418 Fx: (702) 990-8681
Las Vegas, Nevada 89123
Ph: (702) 990-8418 Fx: (702) 990-8681
Trial and Case Outcomes
Man Roland, Inc. v. Kreitz Motor Express, Inc., et al.;
In the Southern District of Texas. Plaintiff sued several entities alleging their negligence under the Carmack Amendment in shipping a printing press from the Port of Houston to Lubbock, Texas. The press, valued at over $1 million, was damaged during transport due to inclement weather. Plaintiff settled with the two other defendants and sought the majority of its damages from the Hays, McConn client. The court granted summary judgment based on the argument that the plaintiff was negligent because it gave specific directions on how the printing press was to be shipped. The court also dismissed all of the plaintiff's claims against the client. Handled by Shannon R. Ramirez.
Sidebar: Plaintiff's counsel indicated that, while he believed the case would be reversed on appeal, he did not know if his client would appeal because they will not be entitled to recover attorney's fees. He also told Ms. Ramirez during settlement negotiations and prior to the ruling on the motion for summary judgment that he was demanding the most in damages from her and her client because she made him work the hardest!
Sidebar: Plaintiff's counsel indicated that, while he believed the case would be reversed on appeal, he did not know if his client would appeal because they will not be entitled to recover attorney's fees. He also told Ms. Ramirez during settlement negotiations and prior to the ruling on the motion for summary judgment that he was demanding the most in damages from her and her client because she made him work the hardest!
Wanda Cox and Charles Cox v. Target Corporation, et al.;
In the 129th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Plaintiff filed petition for writ of mandamus regarding the production of incident reports. Relief was denied by Houston’s First Court of Appeals. Handled by Troy A. Williams and Ruth E. Piller.
Cenorina C. Valdivia v. Target Corporation;
In the County Civil Court at Law Number Three (3) of HarrisCounty, Texas. Defense verdict in slip and fall case where Plaintiff claimed water was due to leaky roof and Defendant claimed substance on floor was urine from Plaintiff’s grandchild. Handled by Troy A. Williams.
Robert M. Archer et al. v. Curtis 1000 Inc., et al.;
In the 157th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Plaintiff fell through a skylight. Motion for Summary Judgment granted to Citibank defendants because property owner did not owe a duty to the contractor. Handled by Troy A. Williams.
Ida Guerra, et al. v. Texas Development Investor LLC, et al.;
In the 55th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Two minors were shot and killed and the security guard company successfully obtained summary judgment. Handled by Troy A. Williams.
Eduardo Ramirez v. AHP Mutual Housing Association, Inc., Quay Point Mutual Housing Associations, Inc.;
In the 125th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. An apartment tenant was stabbed in his apartment unit. Apartment complex obtained summary judgment based on intervening and superceding cause. Case currently on Appeal to the Houston’s Fourteenth Court of Appeals. Handled by Troy A. Williams and Ruth E. Piller.
Ben Cobb et al. v. Target Corporation, et al.;
In the 269th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Motion for summary judgment granted to property owner based on property owner not owing a duty to a contractor. Handled by Troy A. Williams.
Gensala Soliz, et al. v. Tom Welfel d/b/a Welfel Construction and English Honey Farms, Inc.;
In the 329th Judicial District Court of Wharton County, Texas. Wrongful death case involving the death of a blind and mentally challenged girl after she was attacked by killer bees. Motion for summary judgment granted to beekeeper based on lack of duty. Handled by Troy A. Williams.
Oralia Mendoza, et al. vs. Pinnacle Construction Industries, et al.;
In the 280th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Wrongful death case where a roofer fell from a roof to his death. Nonsuit for property owner filed in response to motion for summary judgment based on no duty to the roofer on the part of the property owner. Handled by Troy A. Williams.
Nicolas Martucci and John Martucci v. In Home Health Inc., et al.;
In the 190th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Medical malpractice wrongful death case wherein a pharmacy obtained a motion to dismiss based on a faulty expert report. Handled by Troy A. Williams.
Molly Fitzgerald, et. al v. GalvezShopping Center, et al.;
In the 405th Judicial District Court of Galveston County, Texas. Wrongful death case involving a decedent who died after his motorcycle slipped on sand in front of a business. Property owner obtained summary judgment based on no duty. Handled by Troy A. Williams.
Khan v. Shell Oil Company;
In the Supreme Court of Texas. Unanimous decision by Texas Supreme Court on June 11, 2004, reversing intermediate court of appeals’ decision adverse to firm client, Shell Oil Company. Case called upon the Texas Supreme Court to analyze the tort duty of an oil company to invitees of its independent dealers. This appeal arose from a suit to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained by Mohammed Khan during a robbery at a gas station in Houston. Khan, at the time of his injury, was employed by La Sani, Inc., an independent retail dealer of Shell Oil Company, operating under both a dealer agreement with Shell and a lease with Shell for the premises. Handled by David V. Wilson, II.
Eric and Beverly Hixon v. Tyco;
In the 152nd Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. In a construction defect case involving moisture intrusion in a residence, summary judgment was granted in favor of roofer defendant against plaintiff homeowners. The damages model was in excess of $200,000.00. Handled by David V. Wilson, II.
Danny and Barbara Ross v. Thoner Development;
in the 191st Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. In construction defect case involving allegations of corrosion and defective brick cladding in a residence, summary judgment obtained in favor of defendant who manufactured the brick. The damages model was in excess of $300,000.00. Handled by David V. Wilson, II.
Johnny Morgan vs. Berbice Corporation, et al.;
In the 136th Judicial District Court of Jefferson County, Texas. In a severe personal injury case in which the plaintiff was struck by falling roof material and incurred six figures of medical expenses, dismissal was obtained for the general contractor by using special exceptions. In addition, the general contractor recovered his defense costs from insurers of his subcontractors. Handled by David V. Wilson, II.
McCray v. Finestone;
In the 234th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. In this construction defect case, EIFS applicator represented by Hays, McConn was joined less than one month before trial. The trial judge denied his continuance and assigned the case to trial. The EIFS applicator’s special exceptions were sustained before a jury was called, causing the case against the client to be dismissed. Handled by David V. Wilson, II.
Mullane v. KingwoodLake Apartments, et al.;
In the 61st Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Plaintiff filed suit against the apartment complex alleging breach of the lease agreement, negligent disclosure of information, defamation and invasion of privacy torts after the apartment manager reported to the police that a tenant exhibited suspicious behavior after a sexual assault occurred on the premises. Summary judgment was granted in the apartment complex’s favor because (1) the lease agreement specifically allowed the apartment to disclose information to law enforcement; (2) the apartment complex had a qualified privilege to report such information to law enforcement, which negated Plaintiff’s defamation claim; and (3) Plaintiff had no evidence of the essential elements of any invasion of privacy tort. Handled by Michael W. Magee.
Richard v. Reliant Energy, Inc.;
In the 149th Judicial District Court of Brazoria County, Texas. Plaintiff filed suit after he fell from a telephone pole. Summary judgment was granted based on Chapter 95 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and general premises liability theories because Reliant did not actually exercise control or contractually retain the right of control over its subcontractor’s employees. Handled by Michael Magee.
Wilburn v. Travelers Property Casualty;
In the 113th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Plaintiff filed suit against Travelers alleging breach of contract and violations of article 21.55 of the Texas Insurance Code for failing to pay UM/UIM benefits. Summary judgment granted in favor of insurance company on both the breach of contract claim and alleged Insurance Code violations based on language in the policy that excluded coverage under a UM/UIM claim for vehicles owned by the insured. Handled by Troy Williams.
Provost v. Il Palazzo;
In the 295th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Plaintiff brought a construction defect lawsuit regarding a newly constructed residential high-rise. Summary judgment was granted in favor of Hays, McConn's client, subcontractor Rago Construction, and against the third-party plaintiff and original plaintiffs, as there was no evidence that any work done by Rago caused or contributed to any of the water intrusion problems alleged by Plaintiffs. Handled by Jane Lea Haas.
Knight v. City Streets;
In the 55th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Plaintiff brought a negligence lawsuit, alleging he was assaulted by an off-duty Houston policeman working as an independent contractor security guard, as well as by a bouncer at City Streets. A no-evidence summary judgment was granted in favor of Defendant City Streets because the plaintiff failed to produce any evidence that the actions taken by the officer and bouncer were in the course and scope of employment. The officer was an independent contractor and was acting within his official capacity when the plaintiff was arrested. Further, the plaintiff failed to produce any evidence of negligent supervision or hiring. Appeal is pending in this case. Handled by Jane Lea Haas.
E.R. DuPuis Concrete Co. v. Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company, et al.;
In the 172nd Judicial District Court of Jefferson County, Texas. Plaintiff brought multiple tort and contract causes of action -- deceptive trade practices and insurance code violations; common law fraud; breach of fiduciary duty; negligence per se, negligent misrepresentation; negligent hiring, supervision or management; breach of contract; breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; conversion; and unjust enrichment -- in connection with his purchase of a variable life insurance policy. Summary judgment was granted to the defendants on all causes of action, and the Ninth Court of Appeals in Beaumont affirmed as to each claim. Handled by Craig Wolcott and Ruth E. Piller.
In re Shell Oil Co., et al.;
In the Ninth Court of Appeals in Beaumont, Texas. Shell Oil Company, Pennzoil-Quaker State Company and Delta Distributors, Inc. filed a petition for writ of mandamus in response from a trial court’s refusal to transfer venue of a toxic tort suit from JeffersonCounty to HarrisCounty. The Beaumont Court of Appeals granted the relief, finding the trial court’s refusal of the defendants’ motion to transfer venue constituted “exceptional circumstances” and, therefore, mandamus relief was warranted. Handled by B. Stephen Rice and Ruth E. Piller.
Acock/Anaqua Operating Company, L.C., et al. vs. Padre Tubular, Inc, et al.
In the 135th Judicial District Court of Jackson County, Texas. Plaintiffs sued Defendants for negligence and breach of contract alleging Defendants performed faulty work and caused an oil well to malfunction. All Defendants except Tong Specialty either settled with Plaintiffs before trial or were non-suited. The jury found for Tong Specialty on its counterclaim which was filed on the first day of trial alleging it was never paid for the job. The jury awarded Tong Specialty the amount of the invoice plus $224,745 in attorney's fees. Handled by David V. Wilson.
Results achieved necessarily depend upon the facts of each individual case. Past performance is no guarantee of future results, as every matter is different. Similar results may not be obtained in your matter.
