Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Quarles v. State

Appellant, Morrison, a lawyer from Houston, was convicted of barratry and sentenced to 90 days in jail and a $500 fine. The conviction stemmed from his actions in October 1963, following a refinery explosion in Corpus Christi. Morrison, accompanied by a co-indictee, traveled to Corpus Christi and visited the families of victims, falsely identifying themselves as attorneys from Houston and offering legal representation on a contingent fee basis, while criticizing local lawyers. He also displayed newspaper clippings of past successes. Despite not securing any contracts, he was indicted by a grand jury in Nueces County for the misdemeanor offense of barratry. Morrison represented himself in the trial and appeal, challenging the constitutionality of the barratry statute and the grand jury indictment for a misdemeanor. The court affirmed the conviction, finding ample evidence and no reversible error.

barratrysolicitationcontingent feeattorney misconductcriminal misdemeanorgrand jury indictmentconstitutional challengeappellate reviewevidence admissibilityTexas law

References

Case No. NO. 01-19-00336-CV

Regular Panel Decision

May 27, 2021

Dezzie Brumfield D/B/A LAD Enterprises v. Jimmy Williamson, Jimmy Williamson, PC, Williamson & Rusnak, Cyndi Rusnak, Cyndi Rusnak, PLLC and Law Offices of Michael Pohl

This case involves 272 appellants challenging a trial court's summary judgment in favor of appellees in a civil barratry, civil conspiracy, aiding and abetting, and breach of fiduciary duty suit. The appellants alleged that appellees orchestrated a

Civil BarratryCivil ConspiracyAiding and AbettingBreach of Fiduciary DutyStatute of LimitationsDiscovery RuleTolling DoctrineSummary JudgmentAppellate JurisdictionDeepwater Horizon

References

Case No. 01-19-00335-CV

Regular Panel Decision

May 27, 2021

Alice Marie Gandy v. Robert Williamson, Estate of Jimmy Glenn Williamson, Jimmy Williamson, P.C., Williamson & Rusnak, Cyndi Rusnak, and Cyndi Rusnak, PLLC

Appellants, 135 individuals, challenged the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of appellees, including Robert Williamson and several law firms. Appellants' lawsuit alleged civil barratry, civil conspiracy, aiding and abetting, and breach of fiduciary duty, stemming from an alleged illicit scheme to solicit clients for Deepwater Horizon oil spill claims. The scheme involved lawyers Jimmy Williamson, Cyndi Rusnak, and Michael Pohl paying non-lawyers to recruit potential clients using a

Barratry SchemeDeepwater Horizon Oil Spill LitigationStatute of Limitations DefenseCivil Conspiracy ClaimsAiding and AbettingBreach of Fiduciary DutyAttorney MisconductImproper Client SolicitationLegal EthicsSummary Judgment Appeal

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Adkins v. Hoechst Celanese Corp.

This case addresses whether a Texas trial judge has the authority to change the terms of attorneys’ fee contracts between attorneys and their clients in mass tort litigation that is not a class action. The Appellants, consisting of 49 law firms led by Fleming, Hovenkamp & Grayson, representing approximately 37,000 plaintiffs, challenged a trial court’s order that reduced their contingent fees and expenses from a settlement with Shell Oil Company and Hoechst Celanese Corporation regarding defective polybutylene plumbing systems. The appellate court reviewed general contract law, exceptions (fraud, incapacity), and the inapplicability of class action and common fund doctrines. It also considered whether the settlement agreement itself granted the trial judge such authority. The court concluded that, absent pleading and proof of barratry, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, incapacity, illegality, class action, or common fund doctrine applicability, a trial judge lacks the power to modify a fully-performed attorney fee contract. Therefore, the court reversed the portions of the appealed judgments dealing with the award of attorneys’ fees and remanded the cases for further proceedings.

Attorney's FeesContingency Fee ContractsContract LawAppellate ReviewMass Tort LitigationTrial Court AuthoritySettlement AgreementTexas LawClass Action InapplicabilityCommon Fund Doctrine Inapplicability

References

Showing 1-4 of 4 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

Quarles v. State

barratrysolicitationcontingent feeattorney misconductcriminal misdemeanorgrand jury indictmentconstitutional challengeappellate reviewevidence admissibilityTexas law

Dezzie Brumfield D/B/A LAD Enterprises v. Jimmy Williamson, Jimmy Williamson, PC, Williamson & Rusnak, Cyndi Rusnak, Cyndi Rusnak, PLLC and Law Offices of Michael Pohl

Civil BarratryCivil ConspiracyAiding and AbettingBreach of Fiduciary DutyStatute of LimitationsDiscovery RuleTolling DoctrineSummary JudgmentAppellate JurisdictionDeepwater Horizon

Alice Marie Gandy v. Robert Williamson, Estate of Jimmy Glenn Williamson, Jimmy Williamson, P.C., Williamson & Rusnak, Cyndi Rusnak, and Cyndi Rusnak, PLLC

Adkins v. Hoechst Celanese Corp.