Androvett Legal Media and Marketing
2501 Oak Lawn Avenue  |  Suite 650  |  Dallas, Texas 75219
Tel: 214.559.4630  |  Fax: 214.559.0852

Androvett Blog

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:18:00 am

Bold stripe patterns and other decorative elements on cheerleading uniforms can be protected by copyright law, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday in a closely watched case that has implications for the fashion industry’s ongoing efforts to police counterfeit merchandise. The high court sided with Varsity Brands in a dispute with rival Star Athletica, finding that while the basic functional design of a uniform cannot be protected, Varsity’s copyrights for specific decorative patterns are valid. The opinion helps clarify a long-running debate over a manufacturer’s ability to protect products from knock-offs by copyrighting ornamental designs.

“The fashion and apparel industry is doing everything it can to combat counterfeiting, and this opinion provides the industry with another tool,” says intellectual property lawyer Amanda Greenspon of Dallas’ Munck Wilson Mandala. “Copyright enforcement will remain subjective and determined on a case-by-case basis, but this ruling will spur companies to obtain copyright protection of their work to discourage competitors with the threat of monetary damages.”

To speak with Amanda Greenspon, contact Robert Tharp at 214-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 2:31:00 pm

A Democrat and Republican have introduced legislation that would reform Texas grand juries and require prosecutors to share evidence that could help defendants. State Rep. Senfronia Thompson, a Democrat from Houston, and Lakeway Sen. Dawn Buckingham, a Republican, have filed similar bills in the House and Senate that they say would lead to fairer treatment of those accused of crimes.

Houston white-collar defense lawyer Philip Hilder, a former federal prosecutor and founder of Hilder & Associates, P.C., agrees:

“The proposed grand jury reform legislation would go a long way toward protecting the rights of citizens and promoting fairness in the criminal justice system. Currently, the old saying stands that a prosecutor ‘can get a ham sandwich indicted.’

“If this legislation becomes law, grand jurors will be able to receive a more balanced presentation in which to evaluate whether to indict someone. The bills provide for the presentation of evidence favorable to the accused, something that is not currently mandated. Additionally, the defendant will be allowed to have an attorney present during questioning, again not currently allowed. This provision alone levels the playing field and turns a possible inquisition into a fairer proceeding.

“Finally, the legislation prevents prosecutors from shopping a case to a second grand jury should the initial grand jury decline to indict. This too will promote fairness by halting the practice of seeking indictment a previous grand jury finds no probable cause to indict. In sum, this is a terrific piece of legislation that would even the playing field.”

 For more information or to set up an interview, contact Mary Flood at 713 383-0090 or


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 11:52:00 am

A Dallas attorney says Texas may have to ask for permission to change election laws after a panel of federal judges ruled the maps drawn for three congressional districts violate federal statutes.

The judges found the maps used for the congressional districts covering parts of South and West Texas intentionally discriminated against minority voters by either violating the U.S. Constitution or the Voting Rights Act.

Constitutional law attorney David Coale of Lynn Pinker Cox & Hurst says the decision means that Texas may face a rare remedy referred to as a “bail-in,” which could lead to requiring prior federal approval of any changes to district lines.

“The issue here is not so much what the court said about these districts, since none of them were actually used in an election. It's whether Texas' process for drawing districts was so flawed that the federal government has to take over.”

Texas can appeal the ruling before early May, but that will mean more uncertainty and added delay to an already complicated case, adds Mr. Coale.

For more information or to interview David Coale, contact Sophia Reza 214-559-4630 or


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:25:00 am

Having appeared as counsel of record in more than 800 cases in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and having served as the chairman of the Eastern District’s Local Rules Advisory Committee for nine years, few attorneys have the same insights to the East Texas “rocket docket” as Michael Smith of Siebman, Burg, Phillips & Smith, LLP. His legal analysis is the foundation of the recently updated Eastern District of Texas Blog – considered by many as the “go-to” news source for patent litigation work originating from Marshall, Texas.

In addition to the invaluable free content that readers have come to depend upon, the blog now also offers a subscription service that allows readers to dig deeper, providing more detailed analysis of the judges, the cases and the verdicts in the Eastern District.

“I wanted to provide more substantial analysis to those in the blog’s audience that might want more than just an overview of the Eastern District,” says Mr. Smith. “It involves a personal connection to those that have invested in the content and the blog.”

For years, the Eastern District of Texas Blog has provided readers a trove of free information, unavailable elsewhere, about case filings and court rulings, as well as insights into courtroom preferences of Eastern District judges and their staff members. The blog has an estimated daily readership of close to 1,000 people.

For more information or to set up an interview, contact Sophia Reza at 214-559-4630 or


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 11:38:00 am

Bus crash victims Kenneth and Peggy Hoffman were retired longtime educators in Lockhart, Texas. (Courtesy: Lockhart ISD)

Bus crash victims Kenneth and Peggy Hoffman were retired longtime educators in Lockhart, Texas. (Courtesy: Lockhart ISD)

A Texas woman is suing a railroad and bus company for the death of her father who was killed when a freight train slammed into the tour bus carrying him and other senior citizens.

Kenneth Hoffman, 82, wife wife, Peggy, and two other people died in the March 7 accident in Biloxi, Mississippi. The bus was headed from a Bastrop, Texas, senior center to Boomtown Casino in Biloxi. The charter bus got stuck at a train crossing known to be hazardous for long vehicles and marked with a warning sign.

The lawsuit was filed March 10 in Dallas County State District Court on behalf of Mr. Hoffman’s daughter Kimberly Chapman of Lockhart, Texas. Defendants include Echo Tours and Charters and CSX Transportation Inc. among others. Representing Ms. Chapman is Houston lawyer Larry Wilson of Lanier Law Firm, one of the country’s premiere personal injury firms. Mr. Wilson, who specializes in transportation accidents, says:

“This tragedy should have never happened. It’s horrifying that a charter bus would ignore a warning sign and get high-centered on the tracks. CSX could have implemented policies relating to speed and procedures that greatly reduced the risk of a catastrophe like this.”

The case is Kimberly Kay Chapman v. Echo Tours and Charters, LT DBA Echo Transportation; TBL Group Inc.; Diamond Tours Inc. and CSX Transportation, Inc., Case DC-17-02924, filed in Dallas County District Court. 

For more information about the case, contact Jason Sickles at 214-559-4630 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:22:00 am

A Travis County jury has returned a verdict against Chicago Title of Texas, LLC and other real estate-related businesses, finding they defrauded a young Danish woman of all proceeds from the sale of her $1.35 million condominium at the exclusive Residences at W Austin.

The scheme involved a falsified power of attorney to execute contracts and closing documents in the sale of the condo, and a forgery in connection with a subsequent sale of a promissory note.

Mari-Louise Larsen, a Danish citizen, filed the breach of fiduciary duty and fraud claim in 2013 against her estranged husband, Andre Jones, an Austin-area resident, as well as Chicago Title and the other firms. Ms. Larsen, now 30, first met Mr. Jones in Austin’s Sixth Street entertainment district while visiting the area in 2007. After a long-distance courtship, the couple married in Denmark in 2009.

While in Denmark and waiting to move to Austin, Ms. Larsen testified she agreed to buy the luxury high-rise condo in Austin with funds from a family inheritance. However, Mr. Jones convinced her that Texas law required the names of both spouses to be on the title, despite the fact it was her separate property. Ms. Larsen and Mr. Jones later decided to divorce and sell the property. Mr. Jones then convinced Chicago Title’s contracted fee attorney, Wally Tingley, to use falsely notarized documents to close the sale without his wife’s knowledge. Mr. Jones pocketed all of the profits as the marriage deteriorated.

“This is a case of a con artist taking advantage of a wealthy young woman and actively working with others to violate the law and professional standards in the real estate industry,” said Ms. Larsen’s lawyer, Brian N. Hail of Gruber Elrod Johansen Hail Shank LLP in Dallas. “As acknowledged by Chicago Title and its fee attorney, this was one of the worst real estate transactions anyone has ever seen.” 

Mr. Hail believes the jury’s finding that Chicago Title is responsible for its fee attorney’s actions may have significant implications on future litigation involving the real estate industry. 

“The jury finding that Chicago Title is vicariously liable for its fee attorney, due to the control it exerted throughout the entire transaction, may call into question the company’s entire business model of attempting to delegate closing and escrow responsibilities in the Texas market, and perhaps nationwide.”

In addition to Chicago Title and Mr. Jones, the Austin firm of Wally Tingley & Associates, P.C., and Austin-based JTREO, Inc. were found liable in the scheme.

Mr. Hail plans to file a proposed final judgment order of more than $3.7 million in Travis County’s 419th District Court. The order will be based on a request for all proceeds from the condo sale, in addition to pre-judgment interest and costs.  Punitive damages were assessed against Mr. Jones in the amount of $2 million.

The case is Larsen v. Jones, et al., No. D-1-GN-13-004321.  Ms. Larsen is represented by Brian N. Hail, Brian E. Mason, and Gaby Gutierrez Rawlings.

For more information on the verdict, contact Barry Pound at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 9:25:00 am

A fired Georgia-Pacific system administrator who remotely accessed the company computer system to upload malware, causing $1.1 million in damages, has been sentenced to 34 months in prison.

The case was prosecuted in Louisiana by the U.S. Attorney’s Office under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), which allows for both civil and criminal charges for those accused of hacking. The law applies to former employees who log into employer's system after they had been terminated, says business and employment litigator Elisaveta “Leiza” Dolghih of the Dallas office of Godwin Bowman & Martinez.

“A disgruntled former employee who finds his way into an employer's computer system either to steal confidential information or to damage the system is subject to civil and criminal penalties,” she says. 

“Proving intent behind the unauthorized access, as well as the scope of the authorized access, is often difficult, as the employee will often deny and present seemingly plausible explanations. The key to success in CFAA cases is to have a qualified forensic team ready to go in and catch the ex-employee red-handed when suspicious activity is detected.”

For more information or to set up an interview, contact Rhonda Reddick at 800-559-4534 or


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 9:17:00 am

The Texas Supreme Court just made it easier for citizens to fend off meritless lawsuits attacking them for what they said or wrote.

The ruling on Feb. 24 opened the door for fast dismissals of defamation and disparagement lawsuits far beyond the context of political speech covered under Texas Citizens Participation Act, says Houston lawyer Adam Milasincic of Ahmad, Zavitsanos, Anaipakos, Alavi & Mensing P.C. or AZA. That law was designed to protect Texans from lawsuits filed primarily to keep them from speaking out on matters of “public concern.”

The Supreme Court case involved notes by an ExxonMobil Pipeline Co. supervisor who detailed how an employee missed a critical safety check of a fuel storage tank. The employee was fired. He sued for defamation, citing the notes made about his work. In ExxonMobil Pipeline Co. v. Coleman, the Supreme Court ruled for ExxonMobil which had argued the matter involved a “public concern” because of health, safety and environmental risks, Mr. Milasincic said.

“In the wake of the ExxonMobil decision, almost every defamation claim in Texas is subject to this procedure that can stop a case in its tracks very early. The real strength of the law comes from provisions allowing defendants to win attorneys’ fees and damages designed to deter future baseless lawsuits.

“Texas has one of the broadest statutes against so-called strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP). It was originally designed mainly to protect political speech and activists on either side of an issue. Now it will protect folks who aren’t necessarily all that political but who speak about any old thing that someone else might arguably care about.”

Mr. Milasincic has won two highly publicized anti-SLAPP rulings, one just last week against Landry’s Inc. which sued an animal welfare group over its statements about the treatment of four white tigers caged at the Landry’s-owned aquarium in Houston. That lawsuit was tossed out by a Harris County judge, and Landry’s was ordered to pay $624,000 for filing the frivolous lawsuit.

For more information or to set up an interview, contact Mary Flood at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:07:00 am

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that the right to videotape the police is protected under the First Amendment. In this case, the Fort Worth police handcuffed and detained Phillip Driver in 2015 for taking video of the police station from the public sidewalk.

In Turner v. Driver the court, whose rulings cover Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi, noted that gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting “the free discussion of governmental affairs.”

“This case declares the importance of filming police activities by acknowledging the public’s ability to hold the police accountable and not to abuse their power,” says Houston lawyer Philip Hilder, a former federal prosecutor, founder of Hilder & Associates P.C. and who also serves on the City of Houston Independent Police Oversight Board.

“The Court also notes the importance of the citizen’s role, in that a recording may corroborate probable cause or even exonerate the police if they are charged with wrongdoing. Bottom line, this reinforces that citizens have a constitutional right to record the police subject only to reasonable time, place and manner restrictions.”   

With this ruling, Mr. Driver will be allowed to pursue his Fourth Amendment claim against the police because his right against unlawful arrest was clearly defined at the time. Though this decision makes a First Amendment claim available going forward, the appellate court said Mr. Driver won’t get a trial on that right. The court said at the time of the 2015 arrest, the First Amendment right to video the police had not yet been legally established.

For more information contact Mary Flood at or 800-559-4534.

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 12:00:00 am

Dramatic video showing Harrison Ford’s near miss of a passenger airliner as he landed his private plane on a taxiway at California’s John Wayne Airport earlier this month has renewed safety concerns over the incident. However, Dallas aviation attorney Greg Reigel of Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP, said he expects the Federal Aviation Administration investigation is likely to find the scare was an honest mistake rather than a more serious safety concern.

“If the investigation shows that Mr. Ford’s actions were inadvertent, then it is likely that the FAA will handle the incident as a ‘compliance action’ which addresses incidents that occur because of flawed procedures, simple mistakes, lack of understanding, or diminished skills,” says Mr. Reigel. “If the FAA determines that was the cause of the incident, then the FAA will resolve the situation through counseling or remedial training, rather than legal enforcement action.

“However, if the investigation reveals that the incident resulted from a lack of competence or qualification, then the FAA could require Mr. Ford to submit to re-examination or remedial training, or it could suspend or revoke his airman certificate. But based on the initial limited information available, it does not appear that his competence or qualifications were factors in the incident.”

For more information or to set up an interview, contact Rhonda Reddick at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 11:00:00 am

Republican control in the White House, House and Senate may give new life to trucking industry proponents and their agendas. Lawmakers are expected to establish a new standard under the Trump presidency, which will cover hours on the road, increased weight limits and length of double trailer combinations.

Listen to Dallas attorney Peyton Inge of Chamblee Ryan Kershaw & Anderson, who represents trucking companies, comment on the impact of the restrictions.

In our December blog, we noted Republican lawmakers in Congress effectively suspended the Obama administration’s tight restrictions on work hours and rest breaks for the nation’s interstate truckers.

Inge says some restrictions needed to be loosened:

The industry has found that the restrictions during the past few years actually increased the risk of accidents by forcing more trucks onto the road during rush-hour periods, leading to increased congestion and road safety risks. We’ve also seen that increased regulations have disproportionately affected smaller trucking companies, and that rolling back regulations historically can allow these companies to expand while reducing costs to the consumer.  This change should also allow individual drivers and their employers greater flexibility in setting off-duty time, rest periods and overall business operations.”

For more information or to set up an interview, contact Barry Pound at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 2:27:00 pm

My Other Bag sells inexpensive canvas tote bags that are obvious parodies of pricey designer bags. Luxury handbag maker Louis Vuitton doesn’t get the joke. The company filed a trademark infringement suit in New York that was tossed out because the judge said it was clear the canvas bag wasn’t a typical knockoff copy. Earlier this week, an appeals court judge said he wouldn’t reconsider that decision.

Chris Schwegmann, an intellectual property partner at Dallas-based Lynn Pinker Cox Hurst, agrees Louis Vuitton missed the joke:

“This case is very different from most counterfeit litigation. Just by looking at them, the products sold by My Other Bag are clearly not Louis Vuitton bags. That is part of the joke.

“This is lawsuit is a cautionary tale that trademark holders need to pick and choose their targets carefully. Sometimes by suing, you bring more attention to the alleged infringer, and in this case, it seems that Louis Vuitton is the butt of the joke. There are several examples of trademark holders sending silly cease and desist letters, only to have the action backfire on them in a very public way.”

For more information contact Holly Scimeca at or 800-559-4534.

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:17:00 am

A bill in the Texas House seeks to end regulations that require nurse practitioners to contract with doctors in order to treat and write prescriptions. The proposal, HB1415, would finally give nurse practitioners (NPs) in Texas the freedom and flexibility they have been seeking for decades. It also would cut costs for both patients and providers, according to attorney Bill Hopkins of the Austin office of Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

“From the start, there has been a fundamental tension between their role and the role of the physician in the health care setting,” says Mr. Hopkins, who advises both individual and institutional health care providers on matters involving administrative law, regulatory defense and litigation. “No one has ever questioned that the physician is at the top of the pyramid. But over the years there has been some question as to whether there was some room at the top for the nurse practitioner who can drastically improve access to care.”

Currently NPs must complete four years of nursing school and two years in a graduate-level training program. Although they are regulated by both the Texas Board of Nursing and the Texas Medical Board, the belief is that they still need a doctor to supervise – even if the physician is not physically present and does not even see the patient, says Mr. Hopkins. Similar regulations have been rolled back in other states, with no evidence of increased safety issues. In fact, he says, in some studies, nurse practitioner safety has ranked as high or higher than doctor care.

“For many years, NPs have argued that their knowledge, ability and training were more than sufficient to allow them to practice independently, care for patients and ensure safety,” he says. “The justification for charging NPs for this ‘supervision’ traditionally has been that it is a necessary cost to ensure patient safety. But thanks to the Affordable Care Act, there are more people with insurance than ever before and access has become a primary concern. With the safety argument becoming less relevant and calls for better access getting louder, it looks like this may be the time for NPs to finally get the independence that they have sought.”

For more information, contact Rhonda Reddick at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 9:38:00 am

The executive orders from the Trump administration have inspired a remarkable sea change in the way some folks view lawyers. Accustomed to being the butt of jokes about sharks, liars, jellyfish etc., lawyers are garnering praise as they defend immigrants, fight sanctuary city bans, sue over the emoluments clause and work against the border wall. Attorneys are giving the profession a good name in some mainstream and liberal circles.

There’s a meme going around Facebook that says, “Hug a lawyer today. They are now first responders.” The legal press has noted that at Dulles Airport recently a crowd chanted, “Thank you lawyers! Thank you lawyers!” And a national left wing magazine editorial wrote: “If you want to be a rock star in Trump’s America, go to law school.” Of course it’s not the supporters of the new president who likely feel this way. NBC News has counted 50 lawsuits filed against the new administration in just the first two weeks since the inauguration. And some lawyers will make lots of money in litigation over these and other new policies as the Trump White House reverses course on multiple regulations.

“These are trying times and it’s fascinating to see one of the side effects of Trump’s policies is lawyers gaining public respect and praise. They say you never like lawyers until you need one. This is likely happening because a lot of us need one right now,” says Houston lawyer Philip Hilder, a former federal prosecutor and founder of Hilder & Associates P.C.

“I expect there to be an enormous amount of litigation to be filed in coming weeks and months as the administration unravels protections for the environment, consumers, immigration and more. Policy changes alone are not driving the awakening of legal action, but the general perception that civil liberties and rights are being jeopardized,” Mr. Hilder said.

Lawyers all know about Shakespeare’s praise for the profession in Henry VI when he had a power-hungry character say, “The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers” to disrupt law and order. But attorneys are more used to average folks joking about getting rid of lawyers than agreeing with Shakespeare.

For more information contact Mary Flood at or 800-559-4534.

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:48:00 am

A Dallas attorney who represents former Baylor University Title IX coordinator Patty Crawford and three other former Baylor employees against the university is taking issue with the school’s new legal strategy. On Thursday, three Baylor regents filed a 54-page response in defense of a libel lawsuit filed by former Baylor athletic department administrator Colin Shillinglaw. In the filing the regents detail accusations against the plaintiff and include damaging texts between former football coach Art Briles and other athletic department officials.

But Rogge Dunn of Clouse Dunn LLP says the regents’ response is another misstep by the university’s leadership in an effort to justify its own failures:

“I find it sad that it took a lawsuit by Shillinglaw to cause Baylor to release Briles’ incriminating texts. Baylor is releasing information only when it’s in Baylor’s strategic advantage to do so, and will never have credibility until the university is transparent for transparency’s sake. Baylor’s regents and top administrators continue to deny their own culpability and responsibilities in this scandal and should not withhold documents and other information to release only as weapons in lawsuits. In detailing Briles’ texts and reports of sexual assaults and other misconduct involving football players, the filing only vaguely alludes to the Title IX compliance shortcomings Baylor was experiencing on a larger scale.”

The regents claim that Shillinglaw, Briles and others on the football staff downplayed sexual assault allegations and other wrongdoing involving football players, and attempted to protect the players while showing little concern for the law or potential victims.

For more information, contact Mark Annick at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:25:00 am

Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, a federal appeals court judge, is expected to face intense scrutiny over the politically incendiary topics of abortion and gun rights during confirmation hearings. However, Dallas media lawyer Shannon Teicher  of Jackson Walker LLP suggests that the nominee’s record on the First Amendment is also vitally important given the new administration’s already strained relationship with the press. Ms. Teicher says she is “cautiously optimistic that he would be favorable on free speech issues before the court.”

“There is not a lot of case history involving Judge Gorsuch related to First Amendment issues, but it is important to look at what there is to find,” says Ms. Teicher. She points to Bustos v. A&E Networks, a case in which a prison inmate sued for defamation because he only affiliated with a gang but was not a member, as A&E had reported. Serving on the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Gorsuch ruled that A&E’s statement was substantially true and affirmed dismissal of the lawsuit. In doing so, he explored the historical importance of truth as a defense and called it a “First Amendment imperative.”

However in an earlier decision, “Judge Gorsuch offered an interesting concurrence in Mink v. Knox, in which the court ruled a college student’s parody of a professor was protected speech.” Judge Gorsuch noted the U.S. Supreme Court had not yet ruled on whether parody is actionable when the plaintiff is neither a public figure nor the speech a matter of public concern. He believed “reasonable minds can and do differ” on the issue, so that it was best to avoid such “thickets.” Citing an opinion by then-Judge John Roberts of the D.C. Circuit (now Chief Justice of the United States), Judge Gorsuch said he would only decide what is necessary and nothing more.

“Such careful parsing may well be a preview of the type of measured approach Judge Gorsuch would take if confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court,” says Ms. Teicher.

For more information, contact Rhonda Reddick at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 9:42:00 am

A Dallas constitutional law attorney says President Trump’s temporary ban on immigrants and refugees at airports nationwide is extreme, but not without historical precedent. 

Issued Jan. 27, the executive order prevents citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States for three months. Trump also placed the U.S. refugee program on hold for four months. The order launched massive protests at airports in major cities across the country and brought attorneys together to offer free legal support to detained travelers.

But attorney David Coale of Lynn Pinker Cox Hurst says that presidents have conducted similar actions in the past:

“There is a very broad 1952 statute that lets the president suspend entry by classes of aliens for security reasons. But a 1965 statute imposes anti-discrimination limits on the executive branch in how it implements immigration policy. But beyond that, there is not a lot of case law to go on. More modest bans have been allowed by courts, but with caveats that indicate they were thinking about a possibility such as this. Jimmy Carter did something vaguely like it in 1980 during the Iran crisis by requiring Iranians here on student visas to report to immigration officials, but it is a big leap from his limited action to this one. I think that once the temporary ban ends, however, the ‘extreme vetting’ in the current order will be DOA. The First Amendment prohibits government action that favors one religion over another, and the current executive order clearly does so by giving non-Muslims priority status.”

For more information, contact Barry Pound at 800-559-4534 or


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 2:33:00 pm

Beatle Paul McCartney just sued Sony/ATV in federal court in New York to get his songs back to where they once belonged.

The Beatles songs were sold to Michael Jackson in 1985 and then to Sony, but U.S. laws have changed since that happened. That could mean “Ticket to Ride” and “Hey Jude” revert to Sir Paul in 2018. But the band Duran Duran is having some trouble in the U.K. invoking the same rule, so Mr. McCartney filed a lawsuit hoping to make it clear he gets the tunes back.

“When Lennon and McCartney sold their copyrights to Sony, some might not have imagined that Beatles music would still be popular – much less still under copyright – by the second decade of the next millennium,” said lawyer Steve Mitby, a partner in the Houston law firm Ahmad, Zavitsanos, Anaipakos, Alavi & Mensing P.C., or AZA.

“In the 1998 copyright extension, Congress tried to give the original artists and authors the benefit of the longer 95-year term. But it is far from clear that Congress can modify private contracts – like those between the Beatles and Sony – through that retroactive legislation,” Mr. Mitby said.

Mr. McCartney followed the congressional rules to reclaim his music and served advance notice to the U.S. Copyright Office starting back in 2008 that he was coming for “She Loves You” and more. And no, he won’t just let it be.

For more information, contact Mary Flood at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 1:34:00 pm

A second former Title IX officer at Baylor University is speaking publicly for the first time about the lack of institutional support and the problems she encountered during her tenure. Gabrielle Lyons, who resigned her position at the school in November of 2015, says that top-level Baylor officials routinely withheld information she needed to investigate sexual assault claims from students at the Waco, Texas, institution.

Speaking to ESPN’s Outside the Lines, Ms. Lyons said:

"The violence is what took me aback. My limited understanding was that it was a great Baptist institution. Me, being a Christian myself, I was just appalled at the level of violence taking place so rampantly at the institution.”

Ms. Lyons said the final straw came during a Oct. 5, 2015, meeting with Reagan Ramsower, Baylor’s senior vice president for operations and chief financial officer. Ms. Lyons said she told Mr. Ramsower that "we are suffering," and the staff needed more support as "it's keeping me up at night. I felt that if I had the support, I could do it." Ms. Lyons described his response as "cold" and dismissive. 

According to the ESPN report, Ms. Lyons said that although cases involving football players comprised less than a third of her workload, she received the most pushback from Baylor officials on getting police records and arranging interviews on those cases. 

Ms. Lyons’ complaints about Baylor and the lack of support the school provided for those investigating sexual assaults of women on campus closely track the statements of former Baylor Title IX Coordinator Patty Crawford, who quit in 2016 and filed a similar complaint with the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights.

Dallas attorney Rogge Dunn, who represents both women says:

"Gabrielle and her boss, Patty Crawford, were placed in a hostile work environment and set up for failure by individuals who didn’t want to support the law or the victims of sexual assault. Gabrielle confirms everything Patty has been saying. She makes it clear that Baylor officials did not want to acknowledge the reality of sexual assault among students and stonewalled virtually any attempt she made to pursue legitimate claims. Her exposure of Baylor’s failures to comply with Title IX provides additional evidence for the victims who have sued Baylor and increases their chances of winning those lawsuits.”

Mr. Dunn says that Ms. Lyons’ statements and evidence provided to the Office of Civil Rights increases the chances that the Department of Education will take action against Baylor. Ms. Lyons, who now lives in Chicago, filed a Title IX complaint and an EEOC charge against Baylor last year, and those investigations are ongoing.

For more information, contact Mark Annick at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 1:55:00 pm

A Dallas lawyer says he has serious questions about security procedures at Target following a weekend assault in one of that store’s parking lots that left a well-known Texas theater director with a fractured skull.

Attorney Chris Hamilton of Standly Hamilton, LLP says Target should have taken far more seriously the armed threat that Dallas theater director Derek Whitener reported receiving on the way into the store near City Place in Dallas Saturday night. Mr. Hamilton also says Target sent Mr. Whitener into an ambush by allowing him to later leave the store unaccompanied by store security.

This attack was preventable. Having been informed of the danger, Target should not have allowed its customer to walk alone into an ambush. All businesses have a common sense responsibility to keep their customers safe from predictable and preventable crimes. In our view, all Target security had to do was take some basic precautions and provide Derek an escort when he finished his shopping. Target needs to take the safety of its customers more seriously, especially one that reports armed, threatening men in the parking lot to store security.”

Mr. Whitener is recovering at Baylor University Medical Center after he was beaten with a wooden pole by two masked men in a Target store parking lot the night of Jan. 14. Mr. Whitener had stopped by the Dallas CityPlace store after his performance at Firehouse Theater. He told Target employees that he noticed two suspicious men walking toward him. A Target security officer and an off-duty Dallas Police officer spoke to the suspects and asked them to leave the property. Mr. Whitener finished shopping and was allowed to walk to his car by himself when he was attacked.

Chris Hamilton has prior experiences with cases involving businesses’ liability for crimes committed on their premises. In 2015, a jury awarded his clients $27 million after an attack that began at a College Station McDonald’s that left two teenagers dead. According to VerdictSearch, it was the top Texas premises liability verdict of the past decade.

For more information, contact Mark Annick at 800-559-4534 or



Dallas attorney Chris Hamilton of Standly Hamilton, LLP speaks to reporters about his concerns regarding security procedures at Target following an attack of a Dallas theater director.


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:41:00 am

A federal judge has dismissed claims brought by a South Carolina insurance company against Texas-based insurance agency Highpoint Risk Services and its owner, Charles David Wood, Jr. That lawsuit sought more than $40 million in damages for an alleged shortfall in reinsurance collateral and claims relating to the issuance of various workers’ compensation policies. Last week, Senior U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie ruled that Companion Property and Casualty Insurance Co. was contractually barred from recovering any alleged shortfall from Wood. In dismissing other claims against Highpoint and Wood for alleged breach of fiduciary duty and alleged violations of the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act, the court found that “there is no evidence Highpoint (or Wood) owed or breached” a fiduciary duty to Companion in connection with the issuance of Companion’s workers’ compensation policies.

“The court has dismissed the core of the case brought by Companion,” said Michael Gardner, name partner at Dallas-based law firm Gardner Haas and counsel for Mr. Wood and the defendant companies. “An insurer cannot avoid the terms of its own policies and can’t complain when its agreements are given their clear and natural effect.”

“This is a highly complex dispute covering agreements going back more than a decade,” said Eric Haas, co-counsel on the case. “This ruling is an important step in resolving matters before courts in both South Carolina and Texas, and we’re gratified by the outcome.”

Companion, purchased by Enstar Group in 2015, now operates as Sussex Insurance Company and remains headquartered in Columbia, S.C.

For more information, contact Barry Pound at 800-559-4534 or   


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 3:49:00 pm

Dylann Roof will face the death penalty after a Charleston, South Carolina, jury found him guilty of shooting and killing nine people at the historic Emanuel AME Church in June 2015. Although he had legal representation during the federal trial, he chose to represent himself during the penalty phase, leaving open the possibility of an appeal. It also sets the stage for South Carolina prosecutors to seek the death penalty in an upcoming state murder trial.

Explains Dallas criminal defense attorney Nicole Knox:

“Roof's decision to take the innocent lives of South Carolina citizens is deplorable, and the pursuit of the death penalty in state court is likely an effort to offset any potential success he may find during his federal appeal. Roof has a sound basis to support his motion for new trial because he did not have the benefit of qualified counsel during the punishment phase. Without the arguments of defense counsel, we cannot be sure that Roof, arguing for himself, was capable of pursuing mitigation arguments that could have precluded a death penalty verdict. His post-trial motions and the appeals could continue for several years. Should the state pursue and succeed in obtaining a death penalty verdict on its own case, then Roof will be able to appeal that case as well, but it will give the state another opportunity to hold him accountable for his crimes.” 

For more information, contact Sophia Reza at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 9:58:00 am

It’s hard to predict exactly what President-elect Donald Trump wants in a new health care law, but a repeal of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is rapidly on track in Congress. Dallas health care lawyer Jeff Drummond of Jackson Walker LLP, who represents doctors, hospitals and other health care facilities, has some predictions about what to expect:

“Repeal is almost entirely certain, and will be near immediate with the new Congress. It will be done using the same reconciliation technique that allowed ACA to pass in the first place, thus avoiding the filibuster and the need for 60 votes in the Senate.

“The changes likely will be phased in over time, with very few, if any, immediately repealed. That will allow the new Congress time to fashion replacement parts. And those replacement parts will mostly resemble the old law.

“For example, the new law will allow insured parents to keep their children on their policies until age 26. It also will likely preserve the ban on lifetime limits.

“The new law will drop the individual mandate to buy health insurance. But coverage for pre-existing conditions will be more like the portability requirement under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). That law requires insurers to accept people with existing health problems only when they previously had coverage, such as from their current or former employer. So people with pre-existing health conditions now covered under individual policies through the ACA would be eligible for coverage under the new law, but individuals who did not previously have coverage would be subject to potential exclusion for pre-existing conditions.”


For more information, contact Kit Frieden at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 12:34:00 pm

The upward trend in Texas business bankruptcies continued in 2016 with hefty double-digit increases across all regions of the state, according to an Androvett Legal Media & Marketing analysis of federal filings. In particular, Ch. 11 business bankruptcy filings increased 42.4 percent statewide, with filings up more than 50 percent in both the federal Southern and Northern Districts of Texas.

A glance at the historic numbers is revealing: This continues to be a story about the impact of falling oil prices on the heavily leveraged Texas energy economy.

Writes Texas Lawbook and the Dallas Business Journal:

For the past two-and-half years, the energy industry has been in crisis. Oil slipped to $30 a barrel. Thousands and thousands of people lost their jobs. A record number of oil and gas companies and the businesses servicing them declared bankruptcy…More than 1,280 Texas businesses have filed for bankruptcy during the past two years – many of them related to the downturn in oil and gas prices, according to new data research provided by Androvett Legal Media.

Filings in the Western District of Texas (which includes upstream producers in the oil-rich Permian Basin) increased by 100 percent during the past two years – from 73 in 2014 to 146 in 2016. The jump was even bigger in the Southern District (which includes Houston, San Antonio and producers in the Eagle Ford Shale), where 293 companies filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2016 – up from 141 in 2014.


“Oil and gas is an industry that has highs and lows,” Jackson Walker bankruptcy partner Bruce Ruzinsky tells Lawbook and the Dallas Business Journal. “The temptation in the oil and gas business is to catch the wave when things are blowing and going.


“This downturn has been more difficult than past ones because it has gone on longer and prices went lower than people expected,” Mr. Ruzinsky says.




KVUE Austin reporter Erin Jones notes that the numbers point to softness in other sectors, including the tech industry:

Patty Tomasco, who works in the bankruptcy division of Jackson Walker, said last year her practice saw a steady stream of cases dealing with the natural consequences of tech companies.

"With tech companies in Austin, you have a lot of people competing to be the next great app maker or the next great technology company," Tomasco said. "There's always going to be a winner and there's always going to be about 10 losers. The 10 losers are going to have to file bankruptcy and do something else."

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 6:00:00 am

From the legal debate over bathrooms, to the battle over renaming a Houston law school, to a billion-dollar-plus jury award, Texas was home to some of the nation's most intriguing legal news of 2016. The following is a list of the year's top Texas legal stories as determined by the staff of Androvett Legal Media & Marketing:


  1. Shadow of Scalia and Texas Cases

The unexpected death of Justice Antonin Scalia on Feb. 13 while on a hunting trip at Cibolo Creek Ranch in far West Texas sent shockwaves through the nation’s legal system. And Senate Republicans immediately declared that no confirmation hearings would be considered until after the inauguration of the 45th president. The Supreme Court continued to hear and decide cases with just eight justices for the remaining 10 months of the year. The absence of the conservative Justice Scalia hung over opinions in three hot-button cases from Texas involving immigration, abortion and affirmative action. But in the end, only affirmative action might have been affected. In the landmark Fisher v. University of Texas, a 4-3 vote (Justice Elena Kagan recused herself) upheld UT’s affirmative action admissions policy and created national precedent. The vote likely would have been a tie – with no precedent – had Scalia been on the bench. On immigration, the court deadlocked 4-4 letting stand a Texas-instigated injunction blocking a presidential order protecting millions of immigrants from deportation. And on abortion, the court rejected most of Texas’ stringent new restrictions on a 5-3 vote.


  1. What’s in a Name?

Founded in 1923, the South Texas College of Law is the oldest law school in Houston and third-oldest in the state. Long on prestige and history, what the school was lacking in 2016 was geographic recognition. Citing a failure by many to connect the school with Houston, the school announced in June that it was rebranding as “Houston College of Law.” Charging that the downtown law school’s new moniker was too similar to its own University of Houston Law Center, UH filed a trademark infringement suit to block the name change. In early November, the school briefly known as the Houston College of Law changed course and adopted the name South Texas College of Law Houston. 


  1. A Decisively Blue Legal Island

In 2016, the presidential coattails were long and swift enough for Harris County voters to jettison not just incumbent GOP judges, but also the district attorney, Devon Anderson. Unlike Republican Pat Lykos, who dodged Obama’s 2008 presidential reelection coattails to become the first female elected Harris County district attorney, Ms. Anderson faced many problematic issues of her own in her re-election bid. The biggest was that her office jailed a rape victim as a material witness, and that victim was assaulted while in jail. As a result, Kim Ogg is set to become the first Democrat to be Houston’s top prosecutor since the olden days, way back when it seemed everyone in Texas was a Democrat.


  1. AG Charges Dismissed, Refiled

After more than a year of fighting federal allegations of securities fraud, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton scored a major legal victory on Oct. 7 when U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant III announced he was dismissing charges. However, the relief was short-lived. On Oct. 21 the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission refiled the civil lawsuit, which accuses then-State Rep. Paxton of recruiting investors for a technology company without acknowledging that he was earning a commission. In addition to the refiled federal civil suit, Paxton faces separate state criminal charges of securities fraud.


  1. Dallas DA Steps Down

With her first year in office marked by extended leaves of absence to address depression and other issues, Dallas County District Attorney Susan Hawk seemed ready to put the past behind her. Responding to the Jan. 8 news that a legal challenge calling for her removal from office had been dismissed, she said: "I can't tell you how happy I am. I can't tell you how ready I am for this fresh start and just to get back to work." But by spring, her personal troubles had returned and she reportedly was showing up to her office only sporadically. On May 20, just 17 months into her tenure, Ms. Hawk resigned. The search for a replacement stretched through the summer and fall, until Dec. 6 when Gov. Greg Abbott announced he had appointed former state district Judge Faith Simmons Johnson to fulfill Ms. Hawk’s remaining term.


  1. Campus Carry Concerns

The irony was impossible to ignore. On Aug. 1, the 50th anniversary of the University of Texas Tower shooting and one of the most tragic days in state history, SB 11, the so-called “campus carry” law went into effect. Individuals over 21 with a handgun license may now carry guns into all public university buildings, including classrooms and private offices. Sports stadiums and day care operations are excluded. The law produced a wave of petitions and protests, but after four months, protests have diminished and no gun-related incidents have been reported. Currently, 10 states allow guns on college campuses, with at least one more working on legislation.


  1. Fight for ABA Accreditation

From the day the doors opened at the UNT Dallas College of Law in 2014, officials were up-front about their intention to provide a low-tuition option for a diverse group of students, including those who needed a helping hand or second chance at law school. Local and legal community support soared, but the school still needed to earn American Bar Association accreditation for students to sit for the bar. And with the first group nearing graduation, the clock was ticking. Following a year-long accreditation process, the ABA announced it would defer any accreditation decision, pending additional review. A final decision on whether UNT Dallas will become Texas’ 10th accredited law school may come in 2017, but graduating students received an early Christmas present when the Texas Supreme Court ruled on Dec. 14 that they would be able to take the bar exam regardless of the school’s accreditation status.


  1. Bathroom Battle Ignited

Squarely at the intersection of social and legal concerns, the question of who should be allowed to use what bathroom at department stores and gyms quickly became one of the most divisive issues of 2016. But it was the announcement by Fort Worth ISD Superintendent Kent Scribner that the district would allow students to use the bathroom that matched their gender identity that ignited a firestorm. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick labeled Scribner a “dictator” and called for his resignation. In August, a Texas federal court blocked President Obama’s executive order requiring all schools to adopt similar policies. Patrick now says a comprehensive bathroom bill will be a primary focus in the upcoming Texas Legislature, despite projections from the Texas Association of Business that such a law could mean economic losses of more than $8.5 billion annually and put up to 185,000 jobs at risk.


  1. Billion-Dollar Verdict

There was no shortage of headline-generating court battles in Texas during 2016. There was a $300 million verdict for VirnetX in its patent infringement fight against Apple and the $145 million court win for T. Boone Pickens and Mesa Petroleum Partners involving a failed Permian Basin oil deal. But it was a Dec. 1 product liability jury verdict over hip implants from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas that may have the most lasting impact. After hearing searing testimony of the pain and complications suffered by six patients who got Pinnacle hip implants, the jury returned a verdict of more than $1 billion against Johnson & Johnson and its DePuy Orthopedics subsidiary for the negligent design and marketing of the metal-on-metal implant. Earlier in the year, a Dallas jury awarded more than $500 million to plaintiffs in a similar Pinnacle case. The Dec. 1 verdict was the largest punitive award against a company in 2016.


  1. Baylor Sexual Assault Scandal

Baylor University faced a different kind of bear when a sexual assault scandal enveloped the football program. First, there was the 2015 conviction of a promising football player for rape, but it was a story on ESPN’s “Outside the Lines” in February this year that led to outrage. The investigation centered on allegations that school and football team leaders had turned a deaf ear to multiple claims of sexual assault by athletes over a five-year period. The school failed to report a single incident. Baylor hired the Pepper Hamilton law firm to investigate. Although the full report has never been made public, Baylor President and Chancellor Ken Starr, Athletic Director Ian McCaw and head football coach Art Briles all were ousted or left. The U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights launched an investigation after Baylor’s former Title IX coordinator filed a formal complaint with the office. The school now says 17 women reported sexual or domestic assaults by 19 football players, dating back to 2011; four allegedly involved gang rapes. An alumni group commissioned a recent report that concluded the scandal could cost the university more than $220 million through settlements, investigative costs and revenue losses.


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 9:05:00 am

Late last week, Republican lawmakers in Congress effectively suspended the Obama administration’s tight restrictions on work hours and rest breaks for the nation’s interstate truckers. Under the Trump presidency, it’s expected that lawmakers will establish new standards for the industry, covering not only hours on the road but also increased weight limits and the length of double trailer combinations.

Dallas attorney Peyton Inge of Chamblee Ryan Kershaw & Anderson, whose clients include trucking companies, says some restrictions needed to be loosened:

The industry has found that the restrictions during the past few years actually increased the risk of accidents by forcing more trucks onto the road during rush-hour periods, leading to increased congestion and road safety risks. We’ve also seen that increased regulations have disproportionately affected smaller trucking companies, and that rolling back regulations historically can allow these companies to expand while reducing costs to the consumer.  This change should also allow individual drivers and their employers greater flexibility in setting off-duty time, rest periods and overall business operations.”

For more information or to set up an interview, contact Barry Pound at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 1:40:00 pm

A Dallas jury’s record $1 billion-plus product liability verdict is sending ripples through legal and medical device circles. Recently, jurors in the third bellwether MDL trial returned with a doozy of a verdict for six plaintiffs who suffered serious medical complications from defective Pinnacle hip implants manufactured by Johnson & Johnson and its DePuy Orthopedics subsidiary. The panel of six women and three men deliberated about eight hours before finding J&J and DePuy responsible for negligently designing the implant and failing to warn patients about dangerous health consequences.

The verdict includes more than $30 million for injuries, pain and suffering, and more than $1 billion in punitive damages against J&J and DePuy, based on the jury’s finding that the defendants had acted with malice or fraud. The punitive award was the largest against a company in 2016, according to Bloomberg, which noted “such punishment damages are intended to dissuade defendants from continuing sanctioned practices.”

“The jury is telling J&J that they better settle these cases soon,” lead attorney Mark Lanier told Bloomberg.  “All they are doing by trying more of these cases is driving up their costs and driving the company’s reputation into the mud.”

In addition to Mr. Lanier, the Lanier Law Firm trial team included Alex J. Brown, M. Michelle Carreras, Dr. Robert Leone and Kevin P. Parker. Also orchestrating the win were Richard Arsenault and his team of lawyers from Neblett, Beard and Arsenault, as well as Jayne Conroy and her team from Simmons Hanly Conroy and Khaldoun Baghdadi with Walkup, Melodia, Kelly & Schoenberger

Writes Bloomberg:

The verdict continues a losing stretch for J&J before U.S. juries. Six of the seven largest product-defect verdicts in the U.S. this year have been against J&J units, including three in lawsuits claiming its talc products cause ovarian cancer.

Despite its pledge to appeal Thursday’s verdict, J&J shouldn’t wait for an outcome to approach hip patients with settlement offers, said Erik Gordon, a University of Michigan law professor, who teaches classes about how drugs and medical devices are developed and regulated.

“They may think they have good defenses to these claims, but they don’t seem to be working with juries,” Gordon said. “There’s no easy way out of these cases now that they have a billion-dollar verdict against them. They better start thinking of how they can settle these claims before the price goes up any more.”

Writes Consumer Reports:

The decision marks the latest turn in a medical drama that has seen nearly 100,000 prosthetic devices recalled, led to thousands of hip-replacement lawsuits, and been referred to by a leading medical journal as “one of the biggest disasters in orthopedic history.”

With the fourth bellwether now set for next September, the question on many minds is whether this record verdict will nudge the defendants toward settlement. Lanier tells Texas Lawyer that Johnson & Johnson would be wise to take note of the trial's outcome.

With the fourth bellwether now set for next September, the question on many minds is whether this record verdict will nudge the defendants toward settlement. Lanier tells Texas Lawyer that Johnson & Johnson would be wise to take note of the trial’s outcome.



With the fourth bellwether now set for next September, the question on many minds is whether this record verdict will nudge the defendants toward settlement. Lanier tells Texas Lawyer that Johnson & Johnson would be wise to take note of the trial’s outcome.


I'd love to take credit for some great, huge, hard-to-believe win. But the bottom line is, in spite of the media machine that Johnson & Johnson pumps, these are easy cases. This company was flat wrong, they did some horrible things and their best appellate point is, 'Gee, the jury shouldn't be allowed to know everything we did.' That's pretty pathetic.”

For more information, contact Robert Tharp at 214-559-4630 or


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:38:00 am

A lawyer for former NFL players seeking damages and medical treatment for brain injuries suffered while playing football says the U.S. Supreme Court’s rejection today of a legal challenge to a $1 billion settlement from the NFL means players can get the help they need.

Matthew Matheny, a lawyer with Provost Umphrey LLP in Beaumont, who represented some of the players said:

“We are very pleased that today the United States Supreme Court rejected the appeals of a very few objectors to the NFL concussion settlement. The court’s decision should allow the settlement to become final and effective, meaning that thousands of former players will soon have the opportunity to receive the medical screening, diagnosis and treatment – as well as the compensation – they deserve. We expect the details of the baseline assessment and compensation programs to be forthcoming.”

For more information, contact Mark Annick at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:43:00 am

A planned TV show about the late Tejano singing star Selena has hit a legal barrier. Her father Abraham Quintanilla Jr. filed a lawsuit in a Texas court to stop the new series based on a book by her husband Chris Perez. Her father argues that only Selena’s estate can authorize  the TV show and that because her widowed husband made an agreement for a portion of the estate, he can’t make his own separate deal for a TV show.

Estate planning lawyer Aaron Dobbs, of the Sugar Land, Texas, office of Roberts Markel Weinberg Butler Hailey PC, says:

“Family settlement agreements, such as the one outlined by Mr. Quintanilla, are highly favored by Texas courts and generally will be upheld and enforced in a court of law. It appears that Selena's family agreed on who may use her name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness in the media, and that authority may  lie with the estate or someone other than Mr. Perez. Such a family settlement agreement is a binding contract. So unfortunately for her husband, using Selena's likeness without authorization may result in liability for breach of contract. He could be liable for damages.”

“As with an individual's property right in a bank account or house, an individual in Texas has a property right in the use of his or her name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness after death. This property right is transferable by contract or through a last will and testament, trust or other testamentary document. If the property right has not been transferred through one of those means, then Texas law dictates who inherits the property right. Of course, this does not necessarily stop family members from fighting over the inheritance and use of a deceased person's name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness.”

For more information, contact Mary Flood at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 11:50:00 am

Many employers received a last-minute reprieve from new federal overtime rules that would have gone into effect Thursday, Dec. 1, entitling thousands of previously “exempt” workers to overtime pay. But the Texas federal judge’s temporary injunction creates uncertainty for businesses preparing for the employment compliance playing field going forward.

In a client alert, employment attorney Audrey Mross of Dallas’ Munck Wilson Mandala notes that many employers had already revised workers’ pay to comply with the Department of Labor’s overtime rule. Businesses that have not yet implemented changes now have breathing room to wait for a final ruling from the courts. However, those that have already altered employee pay should think carefully before reversing already announced pay changes.

“If a pay increase was already announced or implemented, and you are considering putting it on hold, there are further considerations that may not apply such as employee relations, an angry or confused employee seeking legal counsel, state laws requiring written notice prior to reducing pay, and collective bargaining on pay issues,” Ms. Mross says.

For more information, contact Robert Tharp at 214-559-4630 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 9:40:00 am

Dallas-based litigation consulting and support firm Courtroom Sciences Inc. (CSI) is suing its competitor DecisionQuest for allegedly plagiarizing a CSI paper on trial tactics. CSI was co-founded in 1990 by TV psychologist and daytime talk show host Dr. Phil McGraw, but he is no longer affiliated with the firm.

The paper in question is called “A Brief Primer on the Reptile Theory of Trial Strategy: Plaintiff Psychology and the Defense Response,” which DecisionQuest’s Ann T. Greeley presented at a 2015 American Bar Association conference. That paper includes key phrases and sentences that also appear in two CSI papers titled “Derailing the Reptile Safety Rule Attack: A Neurocognitive Analysis and Solution” and “Debunking and Redefining the Plaintiff Reptile Theory.” CSI Senior Litigation Consultant and Vice President Bill Kanasky Jr. wrote and published the content in 2014.

“I think it’s rather stunning,” says Dallas attorney Rogge Dunn of Clouse Dunn, who represents CSI. “All of us learned in elementary school that you don’t copy someone else’s work. Copying to this degree is extraordinary.”

The case is CSI Litigation Psychology, LLC vs. DecisionQuest, Inc., No. 3:16-cv-03255-G in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

For more information, please contact Mark Annick at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 9:17:00 am

A federal judge in Dallas has ordered the attorneys general of two Northeastern states to come to Texas next month to be deposed in a lawsuit brought by Exxon Mobil. The company has accused Massachusetts AG Maura Healey and New York AG Eric Schneiderman of unlawfully using their powers to investigate  whether the oil giant misled investors and the public by downplaying the impact of global warming. The company is seeking an injunction barring the attorneys general from demanding internal documents relating to climate change research and investor communications stretching back decades.

“These investigations could have a potentially catastrophic effect on Exxon, based on the documents and information that have been made public so far,” says attorney Chris Hamilton of Dallas’ Standly Hamilton. “However, allowing a company that is the subject of investigations to take depositions of elected state officials regarding their motivations is highly unusual and problematic. What would happen if a criminal defendant sought the deposition of a district attorney regarding the motivation for prosecuting a case? The precedent for a court to allow this type of tactic is concerning.”

The judge’s order advised the officials to reserve Dec.13 for giving testimony in Dallas.

For more information or to set up an interview, contact Barry Pound at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 2:11:00 pm

The $100 million discrimination lawsuit filed against the New York-based international law firm Chadbourne & Parke over claims that female partners are paid less than their male counterparts is less about gender than employment status, according to Sarah Bradbury, senior counsel at Dallas litigation boutique Estes Thorne & Carr PLLC.

“While it is becoming increasingly easy to create an employment relationship and characterize an independent contractor as an employee, an equity partner cannot be categorized as an ‘employee,’ making it very difficult to prevail in this case. However, if a similar lawsuit were brought by income level partners, it becomes a very different case.

“Gender pay disparity may be real at this particular firm specifically or within the legal profession generally. However, even if the disparity exists, in this instance, because the attorneys are not employees of the firm, they simply have no employment discrimination route to pursue,” adds Ms. Bradbury, who is Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.

For more information, contact Rhonda Reddick at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 10:26:00 am

Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones has himself in an ideal succession situation. He waited to draft the perfect candidate – Dak Prescott. He can now let potential future star quarterback Prescott learn while aging star Tony Romo still has the ball, said Joe Ahmad, a founding partner in Ahmad, Zavitsanos, Anaipakos Alavi & Mensing P.C. or AZA.

On his blog Legal Issues in the Executive Suite, Mr. Ahmad says Boards and C-Suite folks should think like Mr. Jones.

“Keep your stars in place, but keep an eye on the future of the company. A CEO can fall at any time, be it from a physical problem like the cancer that took Apple’s Steve Jobs, a sexual harassment scandal like the one that felled Fox News’ Roger Ailes or a government investigation like the New Jersey inquiry that caused United Airlines to drop Jeff Smisek.

“Certainly the NFL may not always get it right or do it smoothly. Just look at the Indianapolis Colts; they couldn’t afford Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck, so they tossed their older star. Of course, corporate America doesn’t have to deal with NFL salary caps. Nor does corporate America have to bench one player for another to be useful. A CEO successor can be the COO or president or serve some other role in the corporation while being groomed to take the helm should there be a natural succession or a sudden need for a replacement.

“A 2014 study by the National Association of Corporate Directors showed that two-thirds of U.S. public and private companies reported they still have no formal CEO succession plan in place. Even though it can be awkward to plan for a company leader’s exit, having no plan is bad for shareholders, bad for employees and bad for business. This can be especially devastating to a smaller business. Even family businesses can have this problem as The Economist notes in discussing a lack of succession planning in family oil businesses in the Arabian Gulf.

MIT Sloan Management Review this summer cited the example of Surveymonkey whose CEO died unexpectedly last year. There was no succession plan. The company looked at 75 candidates before making a choice two months later, only to have that person be replaced six months after that. That uncertainty and tumult had to cost them.

“Apple did it right when the company knew Steve Jobs would be leaving, as I wrote back in 2012. Warren Buffett has been careful about this too. He realizes that such a plan allows people to stay invested and believe that things are, and will be, under control. Boards and incumbent CEOS owe it to their constituencies inside and outside the company to deal with the sensitive subject of passing the baton. Just as a smart company buys insurance for unforeseen problems, a smart company has a succession plan even if it seems the CEO is in great health and the horizon appears to be without scandal. Accidents and quarterback sacks happen.”

For more information, contact Mary Flood at or 800-559-4534.

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 9:50:00 am

Twitter recently suspended accounts of users it said were promoting hate speech, including those with an alt-right think tank. At the same time, Facebook is struggling with whether it should exert more control over fake news that exploded over the social media site during the presidential campaign.

Houston attorney Chip Babcock of Jackson Walker LLP, a prominent First Amendment authority, says the social media giants have a right to suspend accounts and control their platforms, but there are limits.

“The more Twitter or Facebook exercise editorial control, the more liability they will create for themselves. They’ve been able to say we don’t edit content. It’s like the supermarket with a bulletin board where individuals can post notices for babysitting services. The supermarket isn’t responsible for what somebody tacks up on the bulletin board.

“Also, Twitter suspending accounts is not a classic First Amendment issue because the First Amendment is directed at the government, not private business. Twitter has the right to suspend accounts. But the more any social media platform gets into editing its content, the weaker their defamation protections become.

“In the early days of the internet, some providers faced questions about content control. There has been some legislation since then protecting those service providers. But today, there are new questions given the tremendous power and influence of social media.”

For more information, contact Kit Frieden at 800-559-4534 or


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 4:15:00 pm

Two Texas lawmakers have filed a bill cracking down on cyberbullying. Called “David’s Law,” it’s named in honor of a San Antonio teen who was bullied and committed suicide earlier this year. If adopted during the 2017 Texas legislative session, the law would make it a misdemeanor to harass or bully anyone under the age of 18 through text messages, social media and apps. The bill would require school districts to include cyberbullying policies, develop a system to anonymously report bullying and threats and give districts authority to investigate bullying off campus, collaborate with law enforcement and allow officers to target anonymous social media users who send threatening messages.

Dallas attorney Shonn Brown of Lynn Pinker Cox & Hurst says it’s important to provide consistent guidance to schools because they must remain current with technology to help control student behavior on campus and during school-related activities. 

“Schools must be vigilant about monitoring and controlling student behavior particularly as it relates to bullying and technological advances. The schools could probably use some guidance from the legislature in order to police such activities and develop appropriate remedies within the school disciplinary system. Making bullying a crime goes beyond school enforcement and takes it outside the school environment. It will be interesting to see how the legislature addresses that issue and how that may affect students, possibly subjecting them to a criminal record.”

For more information, please contact Sophia Reza at or 800-559-4534.


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 12:35:00 pm

The lawyers at Simon Greenstone Panatier Bartlett are once again providing financial aid for college to Dallas County students whose lives have been affected by cancer. The firm will provide scholarships, which students can use for tuition, books and fees during the 2017-18 academic year.

This will be the third year the firm has provided the scholarships, through the Communities Foundation of Texas, bringing the total amount donated to $150,000. So far, scholarship recipients have gone on to attend Purdue, Kansas State, Texas A&M, Collin Community College, Samford University, Texas A&M Commerce, the University of Texas at Arlington and Austin College.

“We have seen – through the experiences of our clients – what cancer can do to an individual, to a family,” says founding shareholder David Greenstone at the firm. “This is just a small way for us to help.” 

The Simon Greenstone Panatier Bartlett Scholarship Benefitting Families Impacted By Cancer provides multiple, single-year scholarships to graduating high school seniors from any Dallas County public or private school, and previous scholarship recipients, who:

  • Have an immediate family member (mother, father, stepmother, stepfather, brother or sister) who is under a current cancer diagnosis and/or treatment for cancer;
  • Have an immediate family member who passed away within the last two years from cancer: or
  • Are themselves under a current cancer diagnosis or treatment for cancer.

Those interested may apply online through the Communities Foundation of Texas.

For more information, contact Mark Annick at or 800-559-4534.


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 2:36:00 pm

A petition encouraging electors in the Electoral College to switch their votes from President-elect Donald Trump to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is making the rounds of the internet and gaining supporters by the minute. But ultimately, appellate lawyer Chad Ruback in Dallas doubts it will bring about a different result.

“If a significant number of electors from states won by Trump chose to disregard the outcome in their states and instead cast their Electoral College votes for Hillary Clinton, she could win the election. It would not be unprecedented for electors to do that even though taking that action is a misdemeanor in 29 states. In fact, in the history of the Electoral College, 157 electors have voted for a different candidate than the one who won. 

“If the two candidates were separated by only a few Electoral College votes, the prospect of a handful of electors reneging on their commitments might worry the Trump campaign.  However, because so many Electoral College votes separate Trump from Clinton, a few rogue electors would not be enough to affect  the outcome of the election.”

For more information, contact Mark Annick at or 800-559-4534.


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 12:11:00 pm

Donald Trump told CNBC in a 2012 interview that “this country is absolutely crazy” to prosecute alleged violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in places like Mexico and China. He said the anti-bribery law puts U.S. companies at a huge disadvantage, according to Houston lawyer, author and compliance consultant Thomas Fox.

“Dismantling the 39-year-old law against bribing foreign businesses and governments is a terrible idea,” said Mr. Fox, who operates the FCPA Compliance Report website. “Not only does it ensure that American companies are operating honestly, it also is an effective tool to promote U.S. business overseas. And the settlements and fines paid by companies caught violating it help pay for the enforcement of this program. At the same time, the FCPA is used along with another federal law to combat terrorism.

“In reality, it is doubtful that Trump would seek to outright reject the FCPA. What seems more likely is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and similar business interests will seek to limit the reach of the law by amending it to add a defense for better compliance and perhaps limit the use of the law against state-owned enterprises.”

For more information, contact Kit Frieden at or 800-559-4534. 

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 4:19:00 pm

Real estate and energy partner David Drumm at Carrington Coleman in Dallas says the election of Donald Trump as president could weaken the U.S. economy in numerous ways.

“To the extent tax cuts are put in effect and combined with ‘feel-good’ spending policies on things like border walls and creating obsolete and inefficient factory jobs that the market economy does not want, we risk an increase in the federal budget deficit, when debt-to-GDP ratios are already at all-time highs,” Mr. Drumm says. “Weakening the U.S. federal treasury will also inevitably weaken the U.S. economy, because the debt rating on government bonds will deteriorate and we will have to apply more of our GDP to interest on the national debt.

“On the energy side of things, I fear that a weakening of the economy will ultimately weaken demand for energy and thereby drilling activity.”

For more information, contact Mark Annick at or 800-559-4534.

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 4:05:00 pm

While a protectionist trade position has been the chorus of the Trump campaign, little is known about the president-elect’s views on intellectual property rights. Increasingly burdened U.S. patent holders are hopeful for an ally who supports the enforcement rights of small patent holders.

“We know he favors companies in the U.S. versus their foreign counterparts, so it seems likely that he is going to favor strong IP protection to prevent foreign companies from improperly incorporating U.S. technology into their products,” says noted patent litigator Michael Heim of Heim, Payne & Chorush in Houston. “The open question in the U.S. and in foreign treaties is, ‘What is going to be done with regard to the enforcement of IP rights?’ Patent enforcement actions in the U.S. have become a game of kings.  If you are not a large, wealthy corporation with a valuable product line, the deck is stacked against you.  Rules enacted to reduce the number of nuisance-value filings have had the unfortunate impact of making it difficult for all patent owners, especially smaller companies and individuals, to enforce their rights.

“In addition, courts are killing computer-related patents by the hundreds and maybe even thousands, using recent rulings from the Supreme Court to dismiss cases before they can even get started.  We don’t know where Trump stands on these issues, but given his stance on other issues, the hope is that he is going to level the playing field for patent owners.”

For more information, contact Robert Tharp at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 3:40:00 pm

Before mounting his presidential campaign, President-elect Trump indicated support for certain gun regulations, including a ban on assault weapons, but he’s more likely to stay true to recent campaign promises regarding gun rights, says Dallas white-collar defense lawyer Bill Mateja, a shareholder at Polsinelli and noted Second Amendment expert. Mr. Mateja notes that as the election approached, Mr. Trump declared himself a strong Second Amendment supporter, specifically stating that restrictions on guns and ammunition magazines have been a total failure. “The Second Amendment is going to enjoy even more vitality under a Trump presidency – whether it be in using the Second Amendment as a litmus test for selecting federal judges or in emboldening the Justice Department to not reflexively defend the constitutionality of gun statutes that defy common sense, such as the interstate handgun ban,” he said. “Mr. Trump will likely be the Second Amendment’s new Charlton Heston.”

For more information or to setup an interview, contact Mike Androvett at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 3:23:00 pm

Daniel Charest, a partner at Dallas’ Burns Charest, says the Trump victory points to good news for domestic energy producers and pipeline companies.

“I think you’ll see an uptick in energy prices in the near term due to uncertainty and, depending on his willingness to follow up on his promises, a continued increase in energy prices. Meanwhile, he’ll do his best to crush regulations that impose costs on domestic production and development, and as a result make those areas more profitable, at least to some extent.”

For more information, contact Barry Pound at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 12:07:00 pm

With Houston’s close geographic ties and economic nexus to Mexico, a Trump presidency is certain to cause some anxiety due to his hatred for free-trade agreements, especially NAFTA, said Houston lawyer Ashish Mahendru of Mahendru, P.C.  “If NAFTA goes away, the attendant uncertainty in those transactions will cause parties to re-negotiate their agreements and require more definite terms, which may ultimately lead to broken agreements,” Mahendru said. “That creates more opportunities to advise and litigate on behalf of my foreign-trade oriented clients. Additionally, Trump’s isolationist campaign promises could give us an advantage over cautious or scared foreign parties who face litigation in our backyard.”

For more information, contact Mary Flood at 800-559-4534 or


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 11:55:00 am

Philip Hilder, a former federal prosecutor and founding partner of Houston-based Hilder & Associates P.C., sees a Trump administration, possibly with Rudy Giuliani as attorney general, being heavy-handed in prosecutions, focusing on terrorism and potentially setting a tone that could keep investigations into Donald Trump and Republicans tamped down and investigations into Hillary Clinton and Democrats encouraged. “It’s not that the Justice Department has been particularly light-handed under President Obama, but it may become stricter and less open-minded under the Trump administration if it adopts the tone the candidate and Giuliani have used in the campaign,” he said.

For more information, contact Mary Flood at 800-559-4534 or


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 11:46:00 am

Trial and appellate lawyer Brian Lauten at Deans & Lyons predicts that under a Trump Administration, civil liberties and constitutional protections will erode. 

“Specifically, Mr. Trump will attempt to use the courts and the Department of Justice to curtail the rights of legal immigrants, criminal defendants and civil libertarians,” says Mr. Lauten. The Dallas lawyer, who has previously argued before the U.S. Supreme Court, predicts that the court's “lurch to the right” will be reinforced and enhanced by Mr. Trump’s ability to nominate staunch conservatives to openings on the court.    

For more information or to setup an interview, contact Mike Androvett at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 11:34:00 am

Dallas lawyer Trey Branham of Dean Omar Branham says Donald Trump’s election could mean Texas-style tort reform at the federal level. As an example, he expects a revival of the FAIR Act – Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2006 – which was narrowly defeated.

“The essence of the bill was that it would end asbestos lawsuits on both the state and federal level and set up a federal ‘trust fund’ funded by industry to pay asbestos lawsuit claims. The idea was to set up a complex set of medical and factual criteria that a claimant would have to meet to be eligible for compensation and compensation levels were capped without regard to income, loss or facts. Additionally, fees would be capped at 5 percent of recovery. The practical effect of this would be that asbestos victims would not be able to engage counsel and would be forced to negotiate the medical and factual criteria alone and, if they were successful, would get far less compensation than the tort system generally permits.”

For more information or to setup an interview, contact Mark Annick at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 11:24:00 am

Houston lawyer James Prappas of Jackson Walker LLP, who advises clients on strategic immigration planning and related transactional matters, looks for an increased focus on legal immigration during a Donald Trump presidency:

“Mr. Trump will rely less on executive action. Congress will become more involved. The EB-5 program, which permits an individual to invest $500,000 or $1 million, will remain and could be expanded to create more U.S. jobs,” he predicts.

“Mexican companies will establish U.S. operations to increase exports due to the favorable exchange rate. This will increase demand for U.S. work visas.

“There will be a rise in naturalization applications because of (i) Mr. Trump’s victory; (ii) the Republican Congress; and (iii) the upcoming $45 filing fee increase on Dec. 23 from $595 to $640 per person.”

For more information or to setup an interview, contact Kit Frieden at 800-559-4534 or


by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 11:15:00 am

Chris Johns, partner at Johns Marrs Ellis & Hodge LLP in Austin, said that since Donald Trump promised huge spending increases for infrastructure, including on new roads, bridges, and other systems, there could be a lot of land taken by the government through eminent domain. “If he makes good on that campaign promise, lawyers who handle eminent domain cases like those at our firm will see a large influx of new clients. We’ll see cases protecting landowners whose land is taken for public use and ensure they receive the constitutional guarantee of just compensation,” he said.

For more information or to setup an interview, contact Mary Flood at 800-559-4534 or

by Androvett Legal Media & Marketing at 11:09:00 am

Houston immigration lawyer Gordon Quan, founding partner of Quan Law Group PLLC, expects panic and a rush of new clients reviewing their options under Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and other regulations. “While U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and ICE will not change overnight, I see a big push in filings of both relative and employment-based visas prior to any regulatory or statutory changes as a way to establish some grounds for an equitable basis to stay or immigrate,” he said. “Eventually Mr. Trump must deal constructively with the undocumented as they are essential for any economic growth.”

For more information or to setup an interview, contact Mary Flood at 800-559-4534 or

Items 1-50 of 162