News & Analysis as of

TX Supreme Court

Hanson Bridgett

The Texas Supreme Court Detours the Trucking Industry Around a Historic Nuclear Verdict

Hanson Bridgett on

On an icy winter day more than ten years ago, the driver of an F-350 pickup truck, traveling eastbound on Interstate 20, crossed a 42-foot grassy median, entered in westbound traffic, and collided with a Werner Enterprises...more

Cozen O'Connor

Texas Supreme Court Narrows Employer Liability and Explains Standard for Proximate Cause

Cozen O'Connor on

In a significant decision issued on June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court of Texas reversed a jury verdict awarding over $89 million in damages in favor of the plaintiffs in Werner Enterprises, Inc. v. Blake, holding that the...more

Winstead PC

Texas Supreme Court Holds That Executor Who Is Also The Sole Beneficiary Of The Estate Can Represent The Estate Pro Se

Winstead PC on

In Suday v. Suday, the executor was also the sole beneficiary of her mother’s estate. No. 24-1009, __ Tex. LEXIS __ (Tex. June 27, 2025) (per curiam). She engaged in substantial litigation seeking to challenge her parents’...more

Lewitt Hackman

Franchisor 101: Duty of Care

Lewitt Hackman on

The Texas Supreme Court reversed a lower court’s decision against a franchisor based on a theory of negligence after a customer was assaulted by an employee of the franchisee. The court concluded that franchisor did not owe a...more

Fishman Haygood LLP

Supreme Court of Texas Holds that Its Anti-Barratry Laws Do Not Apply to Conduct in Other States

Fishman Haygood LLP on

On May 9, 2025, the Supreme Court of Texas reversed an appellate court’s decision in Pohl v. Cheatham. The case involves two Texas-based attorneys, Michael Pohl and Robert Ammons, who solicited out-of-state clients with...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Texas Supreme Court Limits Franchisor Liability in Franchisee Sexual Assault Case

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On May 2, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court held that a franchisor owes no duty of care for injuries caused by a franchisee’s employee unless the franchisor retained or exercised control over the hiring of that employee....more

Fisher Phillips

Texas Supreme Court Lets Employers Shift Fault To Third Parties In Worker Injury Suits: Key Takeaways For Workers’ Comp...

Fisher Phillips on

Texas employers that opt out of the state’s workers’ compensation program recently received a big win that will impact litigation strategies. While workers’ comp provides a no-fault system, employers that elect not to...more

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Texas Supreme Court Clarifies Ownership of Salt Caverns

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

On May 16, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court issued a decision ruling that, absent specific contractual language, surface owners retain ownership of the caverns created by salt mining operations. The issue of ownership of salt...more

Lathrop GPM

Supreme Court of Texas Holds Franchisor Lacked Control Over Franchisee Sufficient to Create Duty of Care to Customer that Alleged...

Lathrop GPM on

The Supreme Court of Texas recently ruled that franchisor Massage Heights did not owe a duty of care to a massage customer who alleged a sexual assault, because, among other reasons, Massage Heights had neither the...more

Gray Reed

Two Words = Six Million Dollars: SCOTX Reverses Trial Court That Added Words to a Gas Transportation Agreement

Gray Reed on

In American Midstream (Alabama Intrastate), LLC v. Rainbow Energy Marketing Corporation, the Texas Supreme Court held that the trial court improperly inserted the words “scheduled” and “physical” into a contract. By...more

McGinnis Lochridge

Supreme Court of Texas Washes Out the “Anadarko Washout”

McGinnis Lochridge on

The so called “Anadarko Washout” involves a washout of oil and gas leases on undivided working interests owned by non-operating mineral cotenants. This particular species of lease washouts is based on two recent cases from...more

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP

Texas Supreme Court answers Fifth Circuit’s question on loans in ruling

On May 23, the Supreme Court of Texas ruled that the maximum permissible interest on a loan must be calculated using the declining principal balance rather than the initial total principal amount. This decision was in...more

McGinnis Lochridge

Texas Supreme Court Clarifies Limits of Shut-In Payment Notations in Lease Disputes

McGinnis Lochridge on

In this case (Scout Energy Mgmt., LLC v. Taylor Properties, No. 23-1014, 2024 WL 5249490 [Tex. Dec. 31, 2024]), the Texas Supreme Court held that vague notations on shut-in royalty check receipts cannot modify an unambiguous...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Texas Supreme Court: Subsurface Storage Rights Generally Belong to Surface, Not Mineral Owner

Holland & Knight LLP on

The Supreme Court of Texas has provided helpful guidance as to ownership of subsurface storage rights and pore space. In the recent holding in Myers-Woodward, LLC v. Underground Services Markham, LLC, the court held that "the...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Texas Supreme Court Reverses Liability Finding Against Franchisor

Fox Rothschild LLP on

A recent Texas Supreme Court decision fully overturned a jury’s finding that a franchisor was liable for the criminal actions of a franchisee’s employee. This decision underscores the importance of a franchisor having clearly...more

Pillsbury - Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real...

From Shale to Salt: Texas Supreme Court Applies Uniform Rule for Ownership of Subsurface Caverns

In a closely watched opinion issued on May 16, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court in Myers-Woodward, LLC v. Undergrounds Services Markham, LLC, — S.W.3d —, No. 22-0878, 2025 WL 1415892 (Tex. May 16, 2025) resolved a long-uncertain...more

McGinnis Lochridge

Who Owns the Empty Space? Texas Supreme Court Affirms Surface Ownership of Salt Caverns in Landmark Ruling

McGinnis Lochridge on

In Myers-Woodward, LLC v. Underground Services Markham, LLC, No. 22-0878, 2025 WL 4356581 (Tex. May 16, 2025), the Texas Supreme Court resolved two significant issues affecting mineral owners and surface owners: (1) who owns...more

Polsinelli

Landmark Texas Supreme Court Case Finds No “Direct Liability” for Franchisor Arising Out of Franchisee Employee’s Actions

Polsinelli on

On May 2, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court reversed a Texas Court of Appeals’ decision that had affirmed a jury’s verdict finding a franchisor directly liable to the customer of a franchisee for actions undertaken by the...more

Esquire Deposition Solutions, LLC

Texas Supreme Court Embraces Interstate Deposition Act

Texas and Missouri, two states that have long flirted with the idea of adopting the Uniform Interstate Depositions and Discovery Act, now appear poised to take action sometime this year. ...more

McGinnis Lochridge

Texas Supreme Court Rules on Modification of NPRIs

McGinnis Lochridge on

In this recent case, the Texas Supreme Court resolved whether ratification of a lease or signing of a stipulation agreement could transform a fixed non-participating royalty interest (NPRI) into a floating NPRI....more

McGinnis Lochridge

Tackling Free-Use and At-The-Well Royalties

McGinnis Lochridge on

This lease royalty case involved a dispute over whether the lessee was permitted to deduct volumes of gas used off the premises to power post-production activities on other gas produced from the same well. Carl v. Hilcorp...more

Winstead PC

Texas Supreme Court To Review Whether A Corporate Trust’s Shareholder Has Standing To Sue On Behalf Of The Trust

Winstead PC on

The Supreme Court granted oral argument in In re UMTH Gen. Servs., L.P., 2023 WL 8291829 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2023), wherein a real estate investment trust entered into an advisory agreement with an entity and gave it authority...more

Winstead PC

Texas Supreme Court Holds That Unsworn Testimony By Attorney Regarding A Lost Will Should Have Been Considered By The Appellate...

Winstead PC on

In In re Estate of Brown, a charity offered a copy of will to probate. No. 23-0258, 2024 Tex. LEXIS 684 (Tex. August 30, 2024). An attorney offered unsworn testimony regarding the reason for the nonproduction of the original...more

Gray Reed

Texas Supreme Court Allows Enforcement of a JOA Debt After Foreclosure

Gray Reed on

In Steelhead Midstream Partners, LLC v. CL III Funding Holding Company, LLC, the Texas Supreme Court authorized a pipeline owner’s breach-of-contract claim—alleging a co-owner used foreclosure to avoid cost-sharing...more

Gray Reed

Ratifications, Stipulations, and Fixed vs. Floating Royalty Interests

Gray Reed on

After four stops at the lower courts, Kenneth Hahn v. ConocoPhillips has been resolved by the Supreme Court of Texas. The Court opined on the effect of two instruments often used to clarify land titles in Texas: ...more

567 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 23

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide