Case Results

Harris County v. Harris County Appraisal District, No. 01-16-00389-CV (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, pet. filed), reh. denied, 554 S.W.3d 708.

Represented Harris County in an appeal of the trial court’s summary judgment holding that a foreign trade zone exemption applies to a refinery’s oil and refined products. The court of appeals reversed and rendered judgment for the County.

Red Bluff, LLC v. Tarpley, No. 14-17-00505-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2018, no pet.) (mem. op.).

Represented a nursing home employee when the employer appealed the trial court’s denial of its motion to compel her to arbitrate her “nonsubscriber” personal injury claim. The court of appeals affirmed.

Puppala v. Perry, 564 S.W.3d 190 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, no pet.).

Represented a medical malpractice patient when a defendant doctor appealed the trial court’s denial of his challenge to the plaintiff’s expert report. The court of appeals affirmed.

Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris Co. v. Smith, No. 14-17-00807-CV (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2018, no pet.) (mem. op.).

Represented a Houston police officer who had been injured by the negligent discharge of a firearm by a Metro police officer, when Metro appealed the trial court’s denial of its plea to the jurisdiction asserting sovereign immunity. The court of appeals affirmed.

Mendoza Hernandez v. Kroger Texas, L.P., No. 01-18-00562-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2019, no pet. h.).

Represented an injured customer in an appeal of the trial court’s summary judgment for Kroger on the basis that there was no evidence that Kroger had actual or constructive knowledge of the spill on which she slipped. The court of appeals reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case to the trial court.

Harris County v. Harris County Appraisal District, 579 S.W.3d 77 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 2017).

Represented Harris County in an appeal of the trial court’s summary judgment holding that a foreign trade zone exemption applies to a refinery’s oil and refined products. The court of appeals reversed and rendered judgment for the County.

Red Bluff, LLC v. Tarpley, No. 14-17-00505-CV, 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 10712 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2018).

Represented a nursing home employee when the employer appealed the trial court’s denial of its motion to compel her to arbitrate her “nonsubscriber” personal injury claim. The court of appeals affirmed.

Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris Co. v. Smith, No. 14-17-00807-CV, 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 10158 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2018).

Represented a Houston police officer who had been injured by the negligent discharge of a firearm by a Metro police officer, when Metro appealed the trial court’s denial of its plea to the jurisdiction asserting sovereign immunity. The court of appeals affirmed.

Mendoza Hernandez v. Kroger Texas, L.P., No. 01-18-00562-CV, 2019 Tex. App. LEXIS 7555 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2019).

Represented an injured customer in an appeal of the trial court’s summary judgment for Kroger on the basis that there was no evidence that Kroger had actual or constructive knowledge of the spill on which she slipped. The court of appeals reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case to the trial court.

Dewberry Farm, LLC v. Elias, No. 01-18-01058-CV, 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 7086 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2020).

Represented a personal injury defendant in a restricted appeal from the trial court’s default judgment on the basis that the $400,000 damages award was supported by legally insufficient evidence. The court of appeals reversed the default judgment and remanded the case for a new trial on damages.

Texas Health and Human Services Comm’n v. Sacred Oak Medical Center, LLC, No. 03-21-00136-CV, 2021 Tex. App. LEXIS 4736 (Tex. App.—Austin 2021).

Representing a psychiatric hospital seeking in the state’s interlocutory appeal from the trial court’s temporary injunction restoring the hospital’s wrongfully-revoked license. Obtained a temporary order from the court of appeals maintaining the injunction in force and allowing the hospital to operate during the pendency of the appeal. The appeal remains pending.