Brian P. Quinn

Robert Smith sued the City of Lubbock and its insurer St. Paul to recover additional damages under an underinsured/uninsured motorist policy after he was struck by an intoxicated driver while performing his job duties; he had already received workers’ compensation benefits for the injuries. The court affirmed summary judgment for the City, holding that Texas Labor Code § 408.001(a) makes workers’ compensation the exclusive remedy for covered work-related injuries against an employer, and the statute’s broad language—focusing on remedies rather than causes of action—extends to contractual claims under the employer-purchased policy. It reversed summary judgment for St. Paul after the insurer conceded the ruling against it was incorrect and remanded that portion for further proceedings. The court also rejected Smith’s waiver and estoppel arguments, noting those doctrines preserve existing rights but do not create new ones beyond the statute.

labor & employmentproceduretorts & liability

In McGee v. State, Christopher McGee appealed his conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child, arguing that the trial court erred in denying his Batson challenge to the state's peremptory strike of an African-American venireman, in admitting his written confession and drawing, and that the evidence was legally insufficient. The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the prosecutor's explanation that the juror was struck for sleeping during voir dire was race-neutral and undisputed. It further concluded that the confession was admissible because Miranda warnings were provided, the defendant was not in custody during the interview at the police station, and claims of coercion were inadequately briefed. Finally, the court found the confession and drawing sufficient to support the verdict.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a juvenile appellant adjudicated for delinquent conduct based on participation in a burglary of a storage facility and ordered committed to the Texas Youth Commission. The court affirmed the trial court's denial of a motion to suppress evidence from a vehicle stop, holding that an officer had reasonable suspicion due to the late hour, the vehicle's position at the drive-through window of a closed business, a recent similar burglary nearby, multiple recent burglaries in the area, and the vehicle driving away upon the officer's approach. The court also found the evidence factually sufficient to establish the appellant's involvement in the offense via matching descriptions from video and physical evidence in the vehicle, and to support the commitment order based on the appellant's extensive prior record, failed treatment programs, drug use, and inadequate home supervision.

criminal lawprocedurefamily law

This case arose from a negligence lawsuit by Natividad Delgado against an underinsured motorist and his own insurer, Progressive County Mutual Insurance Co., seeking damages including past medical expenses after a tow dolly accident. Prior to trial, the at-fault driver's insurer settled for policy limits, and the jury awarded damages including over $52,000 in past medical expenses. Progressive argued that section 41.0105 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code limited recovery of medical expenses to amounts actually paid or incurred ($4,763.77 after Medicare adjustments and write-offs), and after applying offsets for the settlement and PIP benefits, Delgado's collectible damages fell below the credits. The appellate court agreed, holding that the statute caps recoverable medical expenses at the amounts actually paid on the claimant's behalf with no further billing allowed, resulting in total collectible damages of $24,221.77 subsumed by offsets. The court reversed the trial judgment and rendered a take-nothing judgment in favor of Progressive.

torts & liabilityprocedurehealthcare

In Tanner v. State, the appellant was convicted of assault causing bodily injury to a family member as a third-degree felony based on a prior conviction for assault, but he challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the felony enhancement. The court held that the State failed to prove the prior conviction involved family violence, as the judgment made no mention of it, the plea document's unexplained initials "FM" provided no evidence, and no extrinsic proof such as victim testimony or a judicial confession was introduced. The opinion explained that while an affirmative family violence finding in the prior judgment is preferred under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 42.013, its absence requires other evidence, which was lacking here. Accordingly, the court reversed the felony conviction and remanded for entry of a misdemeanor judgment and resentencing.

criminal law

The case involved Michael Runningwolf, who was convicted by a jury of the misdemeanor offense of simulating legal process after delivering a document styled 'Non-Statutory Abatement' to a woman who had custody of a child; the document invoked ecclesiastical law, contempt of court, and default judgment in connection with an ongoing custody dispute. Runningwolf appealed on multiple grounds, including that the trial court erred by entering a not guilty plea on his behalf after he responded 'bar to prosecution,' that the evidence was legally and factually insufficient, and that the statute was unconstitutionally overbroad, vague, and violated his rights to free speech and free exercise of religion. The court held that the trial court properly entered a not guilty plea under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 27.16 when the defendant refused to plead, that the evidence supported the conviction because the document used legal terminology in a manner that could reasonably be perceived as simulating court process, and that the constitutional challenges failed. The court therefore affirmed the conviction and sentence of one year in jail and a $4,000 fine.

criminal lawfree speechreligious libertyprocedure

In Garcia v. State, the appellant appealed his conviction for driving while intoxicated as a third-degree felony, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence from a traffic stop, its refusal to give a jury instruction under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 38.23, and the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence. The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion because an officer received a detailed report from a known employee at the scene of a disturbance involving an intoxicated person, personally observed the informant identify the appellant, and confirmed key details before directing another officer to detain him. The court further found that the evidence, including the officer's observations of bloodshot eyes, the smell of alcohol, the appellant's admission to drinking, and failed field sobriety tests, was sufficient to support the jury's verdict beyond a reasonable doubt.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned a medical negligence claim by Mary Beth Harris and her husband against University Medical Center, a governmental entity operating as Lubbock County Hospital District, after a surgical towel was left inside Harris following a hysterectomy. UMC filed a plea to the jurisdiction asserting governmental immunity under the Texas Tort Claims Act, which the trial court denied. The appellate court affirmed the denial, holding that the facts alleged and supported by evidence showed UMC employees used tangible personal property by supplying, moistening, handing over, and sharing responsibility for the towel during surgery, thereby triggering the waiver of immunity in Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 101.021(2).

torts & liabilityprocedurehealthcare

The case involved a dispute over lien priority on a 6.22-acre tract of land in Bell County, Texas, between Wind Mountain Ranch, LLC's interest under a 1978 deed of trust (assigned and foreclosed in 2003) and the City of Temple's 2003 abstract of judgment lien against the prior owner Centex for code violations. The trial court declared the deed of trust void and the City's judgment lien superior, denying the City's damage claims but granting declaratory relief. The court of appeals affirmed, holding that unchallenged findings established no written extension of the deed of trust was recorded in Bell County and the City lacked actual or constructive notice of any renewal, consistent with Texas recording statutes requiring public records to disclose matters affecting land titles. The court also rejected challenges to the form of action as a declaratory judgment rather than trespass to try title and to the City's standing, noting the bankruptcy confirmation order was not recorded locally.

propertyprocedure

The case involved Barry Joachim suing Travelers Insurance Company for an underinsured motorist claim arising from a 1997 car accident. After Joachim filed a notice of nonsuit in the first suit, the trial court dismissed the case with prejudice for want of prosecution. Joachim then refiled the same claims in a new suit, prompting Travelers to seek summary judgment on grounds of res judicata based on the prior dismissal. The appellate court reversed the summary judgment, reasoning that the nonsuit withdrew the merits of the case from the trial court's jurisdiction, rendering the dismissal order void and incapable of supporting a res judicata defense.

proceduretorts & liability

This case concerned a dispute over the valuation and return of stock owned by a ward in an ongoing guardianship. The corporation filed suit in Dallam County for a declaratory judgment on the stock, while the guardianship proceeding had been initiated in the constitutional county court of Lubbock County. The guardian sought dismissal on jurisdictional grounds, but the trial court denied the motion and granted summary judgment to the corporation. The appellate court reversed, ruling that Texas Probate Code provisions make the administration of a guardianship estate a single proceeding in rem, granting the initiating court exclusive jurisdiction over all matters incident to the estate, including claims against it or actions involving the right to property. Because the Lubbock court had acquired jurisdiction, the Dallam court lacked authority to hear the case.

procedureproperty

In Rey v. State, Daniel Rey was convicted of abandoning or endangering a child after he broke into his estranged wife's apartment, removed his biological one-year-old daughter, and left behind his three-year-old stepson alone at night. The court of appeals, sitting en banc, reversed the conviction and rendered a judgment of acquittal. The core reasoning was that the State failed to prove Rey had assumed custody, care, or control of the stepson as required by Texas Penal Code § 22.041(b), because stepparent status alone does not create such responsibility without evidence that the stepparent received the child into the family or accepted ongoing obligations, which was absent here given the separation and lack of support or cohabitation.

criminal lawfamily law

This case is a Stowers action in which the Segers, as assignees of rights from Diatom Drilling, sued Yorkshire and Ocean Marine insurers for wrongful refusal to defend Diatom and negligent failure to settle an underlying negligence and gross negligence suit within policy limits after Randall Seger was killed in a rig collapse. The underlying trial produced a $15 million judgment against Diatom, after which the Segers pursued the insurers and obtained partial summary judgment on coverage, demand within limits, fully adversarial relationship, and trial issues, plus a directed verdict on damages tied to the underlying judgment. The court of appeals affirmed in part and reversed and remanded for further proceedings, focusing on procedural and evidentiary rulings regarding the underlying judgment's admissibility and effect, the adversarial nature of the prior trial, and related motions.

business & regulatorytorts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a dispute between First State Bank and its borrower Morse, who had pledged car titles as collateral for a floor plan line of credit; the bank released numerous titles to a third party, Scarbrough, contrary to Morse's instructions, after which Scarbrough sold the vehicles and applied the proceeds to his own separate debt owed to the bank. Morse sued for negligence, conversion, and related claims, while the bank challenged the jury findings on negligence, comparative responsibility, and damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed and rendered in part, holding that the evidence was legally insufficient to support the negligence verdict because the harm was not foreseeable, but that the bank and its successor were liable for conversion of the proceeds and awarding Morse the corresponding jury-determined damages. On rehearing, the court clarified that the conversion award applied to the merged successor bank as well.

business & regulatorytorts & liabilityproperty

In Hamilton v. Wilson, Nadine Lambert sued Dr. Selma Wilson for medical negligence, alleging that Wilson's improper intubation during anesthesia caused a torn esophagus. The trial court granted Wilson's no-evidence motion for summary judgment, and the appellate court affirmed. The court held that Lambert failed to present more than a scintilla of competent evidence showing that the endotracheal tube entered the esophagus, which was required to establish both a breach of the applicable standards of care and proximate causation. Expert opinions offered by Lambert were deemed insufficient because they were either based on mere possibilities or consisted of conclusory beliefs without factual support from the record. As a result, the summary judgment in favor of Wilson was upheld.

torts & liabilityprocedurehealthcare

This case involved a dispute over a construction contract for a Holiday Inn Express hotel in Texas, where the owner RAJ withheld payment on two pay applications totaling over $189,000 after the contractor Darco completed most work, leading Darco to file mechanic's liens and sue for breach of contract, lien foreclosure, and related claims. The trial court ruled for Darco on substantial performance grounds, awarding the unpaid amount (offset by about $10,000 for minor defects), 18% prejudgment interest, attorney fees, costs, and lien foreclosure, while also addressing some tort claims. On appeal, the court modified and affirmed the judgment, finding that Darco had substantially performed its obligations under the contract despite aesthetic brickwork issues that were not structural, that the owner could not withhold payment on that basis, and that the evidence supported the damages and lien remedies without requiring additional proof of remediation costs.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedure

This case involved a medical malpractice lawsuit brought by the surviving wife and daughter of a patient who died after suffering a heart attack and subsequent seizures while under the care of Dr. Guy Wells. The plaintiffs served an expert report as required by Texas law, but Wells objected that it inadequately addressed causation. The trial court denied the objections, and Wells appealed. The appellate court reversed, holding that the report was insufficient because the expert's statements on causation were conclusory and failed to explain with factual detail how the alleged breaches of the standard of care caused the patient's death. The matter was remanded for further proceedings, including possible amendment of the report.

healthcareproceduretorts & liability

In Garrett v. Borden, an inmate appealed the dismissal of his pro se petition against multiple Texas Department of Criminal Justice employees, alleging they committed unprovoked physical assaults on him in retaliation for filing grievances and denied him food and water for three days. The trial court dismissed the case solely on the ground that the pleadings failed to state a cause of action. The appellate court reversed, holding that the described incidents of excessive force resulting in significant injuries and the denial of basic necessities were sufficient to state viable claims under applicable legal standards for such prisoner allegations. The court reasoned that these facts met the elements for excessive force and conditions-of-confinement claims, even if other allegations did not. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

criminal lawcivil rightsprocedure

Michael Cox, a prison inmate convicted in 1992, sought transcripts, records, and other documents from his criminal case via a motion to the trial court, claiming they were needed to challenge his plea bargain. The trial court denied the requests, and Cox appealed. The appellate court affirmed the denial, ruling that Texas Government Code § 552.028 permits governmental bodies to refuse record requests from incarcerated individuals and that Griffin v. Illinois does not apply because the request was not for a direct appeal but for a collateral attack on the conviction.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Sandra Willis suing Gary Willoughby for negligence after she broke her ankle during a self-defense training class he instructed, with her husband and a workers' compensation insurer also asserting related claims. Willis had signed a pre-injury waiver/release form in which she acknowledged the activity was inherently dangerous, assumed all risks of injury, and released Willoughby from liability for resulting damages. The trial court granted summary judgment to Willoughby on multiple grounds without specifying which, and the appellate court affirmed because the contractual assumption of risk (which remains viable in Texas) negated any duty to protect against foreseeable injuries from physical contact in the class, as supported by the evidence and common sense.

torts & liabilityprocedure