Dispositive Motions in the 151 st District Court The Judge s Perspective Prepared for Montgomery County Bar Association Law Day May 4, 2018 A View

Similar documents
THE CERTIFICATE OF MERIT STATUTE

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION ORDER ON ANTI-SLAPP MOTION

1 of 1 DOCUMENT. SHERYL JOHNSON-TODD, Appellant V. JOHN S. MORGAN, Appellee NO CV COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, NINTH DISTRICT, BEAUMONT

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

AOL, INC., Appellant. DR. RICHARD MALOUF AND LEANNE MALOUF, Appellants

Texas Citizens Participation Act: A Broad Dismissal Tool

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Case 1:17-cv LY Document 18 Filed 12/28/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

MEMORANDUM OPINION. No CV. KILLAM RANCH PROPERTIES, LTD., Appellant. WEBB COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellee

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

Interlocutory Appeal Update

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

No CV. On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC A

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV. DFW ADVISORS LTD. CO., Appellant V. JACQUELINE ERVIN, Appellee

A. What is Civil Procedure? Civil procedure is about the rules that govern the exercise of state power through civil lawsuits.

How State High Courts Are Reshaping Anti-SLAPP Laws

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS. No CV. From the 335th District Court Burleson County, Texas Trial Court No. 26,407 MEMORANDUM OPINION

THE LATEST TORT REFORM: THE CERTIFICATE OF MERIT

NUMBER CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXAS STATE BOARD OF NURSING, BERNARDINO PEDRAZA JR.,

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas OPINION

COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI EDINBURG

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV. INTRAS, LLC, Appellant V. CORE 3 TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Appellee

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

Texas Courts Split On Certificate Of Merit

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

The court annexed arbitration program.

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MISSOURI ASSOCIATE DIVISION ORDER

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV. BBP SUB I LP, Appellant V. JOHN DI TUCCI, Appellee

Eleventh Court of Appeals

NO

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 16, 2017 Session

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

RULES GOVERNING ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

CHAPTER ACTIONS

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE February 14, 2005 Session

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

The New Texas Rule 47 Pleading Rules: What Are They and Why Should I Care?

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

REVERSE and REMAND in part; AFFIRM in part; and Opinion Filed February 20, In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

CAUSE NO GINGER WEATHERSPOON, IN THE 44 th -B JUDICIAL. Defendant. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT S PLEA TO THE JURISDICTION

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

2018COA107. A division of the court of appeals considers whether the. district court may consider documents outside the bare allegations

COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI EDINBURG

NUMBER CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI EDINBURG IN RE FLUOR ENTERPRISES, INC. F/K/A FLUOR DANIEL, INC.

HEALTH CARE LIABILITY UPDATE, 2014

ARBITRATION AGREEMENT ALERT-- U.S. FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS INVALIDATES ARBITRATION CLAUSE IN AT-WILL HANDBOOK, APPLYING TEXAS LAW

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

CBA Municipal Court Pro Bono Panel Program Municipal Procedure Guide 1 February 2011

Dodge County. 1) Rules of Decorum. (Sixth Judicial District)

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS MUNICIPAL DEPARTMENT, FIRST DISTRICT

Recent Changes to the TRCP. The computers have come for us, and Mountains into Mole Hills.

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE September 9, 2008 Session. VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY v. NEW HOPE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

NO CV. IN RE MARK CECIL PROVINE, Relator. Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus * * * NO.

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV. CITY OF DALLAS, Appellant V. D.R. HORTON TEXAS, LTD.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE February 11, 2005 Session

When Judgments Go Wrong

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS MUNICIPAL DEPARTMENT, FIRST DISTRICT

Supreme Court of Florida

SUMMARY JUDGMENT Calhoun/Cleburne County Bar Association By Shaun L. Quinlan, Esq.

Don t Leave Without Your Ethics. Christopher A. Guetti, Flink Smith Law LLC

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

AN ACT. (H. B. 2249) (Conference) (No ) (Approved December 29, 2009)

January 2018 RULES OF THE ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION

We refer to DHS and Thornton collectively as appellees.

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

In the Court of Appeals of Georgia

Transcription:

Dispositive Motions in the 151 st District Court The Judge s Perspective Prepared for Montgomery County Bar Association Law Day May 4, 2018 A View from the Bench

Traditional Summary Judgments Governed by TRCP 166a. Partial or Final? The title. Who is moving? Who is not moving? What claims are involved? Not involved? Plaintiffs? Plaintiff? Defendant? Intervenor? Counterclaim-Defendant? What capacity is a party moving in? Next friend? Individually? Both? By XYZ Corp? Careful with possessives. Be accurate and consistent.

Traditional Summary Judgments cont. Must give at least 21 full days notice. No longer three days extra for faxing. Electronic filing. I am seeing these on precisely the 21 st day after filing. Object if not 21 days. Trial court will almost always require a reset, but not a full 21 more days necessarily. Concise summary. Write. Rewrite. Edit. Clear, linear arguments. Bite sized pieces. Clear citations to evidence: Kang v. Derrick, 2014 WL 2048424, *7 (Tex. App. Houston [14 th } May 15, 2014, no pet.). On appeal, Kang and the Lees contend that the trial court erred by insisting that they somehow denominate what evidence supported which element of their claims and defenses. However, this is precisely what rule 166a(i) and our case law require. Page *9: let me tell you a logical story

Objections to Summary Judgment Evidence Make them. But, don t object to everything just because you can. Make objections where warranted to knock out the movant s or respondent s evidentiary support. Give the Court a granulated order as to each objection and subpart. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendant s objection to paragraph 5 of Paul Plaintiff s Affidavit (Exhibit 3) on the ground that the statements therein concerning damages are conclusory is hereby: SUSTAINED OVERRULED If a movant or respondent attaches evidence that was not produced in discovery, but should have been, Rule 166a(d) provides another basis for objection if the party using that evidence has not complied with the deadlines in that Rule.

Your Pleadings in Support of MSJ Make sure your pleadings support your motion. Amend, and seek leave of court to do so if necessary. Failure to seek leave within 8 days of the hearing will usually result in denial of the amendment. Seek a written continuance if necessary explaining what you need in discovery or what you are missing that you need in order to properly respond. Be specific and thorough.

Citations to Caselaw Be correct. Be honest. Use parentheticals or explain what the holding is and how the case is analogous to the present case. Don t just cite a case (unless it s one everyone knows, like Clear Creek, setting out the summary judgment standard. Most judges, per a survey, prefer citations in the body of the motion rather than in endless footnotes.

Tips Specific to the Response to MSJ File a response. Timely. With evidence. Cite to specific parts of that evidence that say what you say that it says. Seek a continuance if necessary, and explain why you need it. If you haven t been diligent with discovery, you re less likely to get the continuance. If a cause of action is truly not viable, concede it. You ll gain credibility. A good example is negligent entrustment. Don t confuse questions of fact (intent, reasonableness) with fact issues. Distinguish the movant s case law and cite your own and explain it. Remember the current caselaw that Ch. 38 attorney s fees may only be awarded against a corporation or individual (not a LLC or LP or other entity).

The Proposed Order Give the Court a separate order on the summary judgment evidence objections. Give the Court a thorough order on the motion itself. Let the Court grant some of your relief rather than just Grant or Deny the whole thing if appropriate. Not always appropriate because of how an appellate court reviews MSJs. What does a Grant or Denial mean in your case. It could mean that plaintiff s case is dismissed with prejudice, and that this is a final order resolving all parties and causes of action. Or it could be only partial. Spell that out so you can be sure to start the appellate clock. It helps the Judge and the clerks, too. If it s a final order, spell out what you ll be going home with not just a dismissal, possibly, but attorney s fees (trial AND appellate), prejudgment interest, taxable costs of court, postjudgment interest, permanent injunction, etc. Be sure to include evidence to support an award of trial and appellate fees (and segregate fees) where appropriate.

New Topic - Certificates of Conference Not required for MSJ s, of course. Where required by the rules, and the Harris County local rules and the local rules of the 151 st, you need a thorough one. An unreturned phone call, without more, is not a conference. An email, without more, is not a conference. Sending a copy of the motion, without more, is not a conference. The idea is to actually confer and see what you can agree on. This is required by the Texas Lawyer s Creed and the newer attorney oath. If the other side won t confer, detail your efforts in your certificate of conference.

No Evidence Motions for Summary Judgment Courts have grown to like these motions because they re usually shorter, and shall be granted if no response is filed. File a response. Attach and cite to admissible evidence. Be sure that, as movant, a sufficient time for discovery has elapsed. Usually in a DCO, or at the end of the first DCO discovery period. If you think your case is an exception, and you should be allowed to file sooner, explain why.

Rule 91a Motions New as of 2013. It is designed to expeditiously dismiss baseless causes of action. Akin to FRCP 12(b)(6), and appellate courts rely on that federal caselaw. But, federal pleading standards are more stringent, and Rule 91a did not revoke Texas s fair notice pleading standard. These are not very common yet. Rule 91a does not apply to Family Code cases. 45 day deadline to grant or deny is merely harmless error. Must give formal notice to the non-movant. It s not implied that the matter is ripe for hearing by the 45 th day.

Rule 91a continued For a complaint to survive a Rule 91a motion, it must contain enough facts to state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face. A party may move to dismiss a cause of action on the ground that a cause of action has no basis in law or fact. A COA has no basis in law if the allegations, taken as true, together with inferences reasonably therefrom, do not entitle the claimant to the relief sought. A COA has no basis in fact if no reasonable person could believe the facts pleaded. The court must construe pleadings liberally in favor of the plaintiff, and look to the pleader s intent, and accept the factual allegations as true. A Rule 91a motion is an appropriate vehicle to assert an affirmative defense of immunity in state court (GoDaddy.com, LLC v. Toups, 429 S.W.3d 752, 754-55 (Tex. App. Beaumont 2014, pet. denied).

Chapter 27 Anti-SLAPP Motions CPRC Ch. 27.001 et seq., the Texas Citizens Participation Act, also known as anti-slapp motions. SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. A lawsuit intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of litigation so they ll stop. 2011 legislation ostensibly designed to deter such suits by bolstering First Amendment protections available to defendants. Review and understand deadlines. Must be filed within 60 days of service of the suit (absent additional causes of action or parties). All discovery in the suit is suspended until the Court rules on the motion. The purpose of Ch. 27 is to encourage and safeguard the constitutional rights of persons to petition, speak freely, associate freely, and otherwise participate in government to the maximum extent.. and protect the rights of a person to file meritorious lawsuits for demonstrable injury.

Ch. 27 Motion to Dismiss Use is Growing and Widening It is now used in more than simple free speech cases where an activist made a statement or created a petition. Includes public and private speech. Includes speech towards the government and matters of concern to the marketplace. Matters of public concern include the provision of medical services. Has been applied to defeat and dismiss breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, gross negligence, malicious prosecution, false imprisonment claims. Almost any kind of case where there is a communication. Youngkin v. Hines, 2018 WL 1973661, No. 16-0935 (Tex., April 27, 2018): Applies to protect an attorney s communication of a Rule 11 agreement into the court s record, so that he could bring a Ch. 27 motion to dismiss fraud claims arising out of his alleged intent never to comply with the Rule 11 agreement. Because attorney was immune for conduct in entering Rule 11 agreement, dismissal was then mandatory, with attorney s fees, costs, and potential sanctions. It is on the verge of a new cottage industry allowing for attorney s fees where none might otherwise be available.

Ch. 27 Be Ready For It. Advise Your Clients A big trap for the unwary In deciding whether to grant the motion to dismiss the action pursuant to Ch. 27, court must determine (1) whether the moving defendant has shown by a preponderance of the evidence (where does the evidence come from if there s no discovery?) that the legal action is based on, relates to, or is in response to the party s exercise of the right of free speech, to petition, or of association (reviewed de novo); and Whether the plaintiff, in response, has shown by clear and specific evidence a prima facie case for each essential element of the claim in question. (review of pleadings and evidence in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff). A successful motion to dismiss requires an award of court costs, fees, and other expenses incurred in defending the legal action, plus sanctions sufficient to deter similar actions. A frivolous motion to dismiss, or one brought solely to delay, can result in attorney s fees awarded to the non-movant (Plaintiff). The bottom line is be ready to defend an anti-slapp TCPA motion to dismiss at the time you file any sort of lawsuit based upon any conceivable communication or alleged wrongful termination (association). It s the new Health Care Liability Act that could apply to anything at any time.

Certificates of Merit Dismissal, CPRC 150.001 et seq. In any action or arbitration proceeding for damages arising out of the provision of professional services by a licensed or registered professional, the plaintiff shall be required to file with the complaint an affidavit of a third party licensed architect surveyor or engineer competent to testify which shall set forth at least one negligent act, error, or omission claimed to exist and the factual basis for each such claim. Must be with original petition as to that professional. Sharp Eng g v. Luis, 321 S.W.3d 748, 752 (Tex. App. Houston [14 th Dist.] 2010, no pet.). we are bound by the rules of statutory construction even though it would appear that the legislative draftsmanship has yielded only a trap for the unwary rather than a screen for meritless claims. Id. at 754 (Sullivan, J., concurring).

Certificate of Merit cont. Dismissal, though mandatory, may be without prejudice. 150.002(e) ( This dismissal may be with prejudice ). Pedernal Energy, LLC v. Bruington Eng g, Ltd., 536 S.W.3d 487, 496 (Tex. 2017) (employing an abuse of discretion standard for review of whether the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing without prejudice). An order granting or denying a motion to dismiss under CPRC 150.001 et seq. is immediately appealable as an interlocutory order. 151.002(f) It does not apply to a suit for the payment of fees for the provision of professional services. 150.002(h). It does not apply to a third-party plaintiffs or cross-claimants because they are not the plaintiff. Jaster v. Comet II Const. Co., 438 S.W.3d 556, 571 (Tex. 2014).

Remainder of My Paper The paper goes on to discuss: Pleas to the Jurisdiction Motions to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution (DWOP) Special Exceptions Special Appearances Default Judgment Motions (Top 10 List), and Death Penalty Sanctions. Remember: No [person] ever reached to excellence in any one art or profession without having passed through the slow and painful process of study and preparation. ~ Horace (Roman poet, 65 BC 27 BC)

THE END