James A. Baker

In Anadarko Petroleum Corp. v. Thompson, the dispute centered on whether a 1936 gas mining lease terminated after actual production ceased for 61 days in 1981 and 91 days in 1985 due to pipeline repairs. The Supreme Court of Texas held that the lease did not terminate and reversed the court of appeals' judgment affirming partial summary judgment for the lessors. The court reasoned that the habendum clause extending the lease "as long thereafter as gas is or can be produced" is satisfied by a well capable of production, and the cessation-of-production clause requiring resumption of drilling operations within sixty days does not impose a requirement of continuous actual production to avoid termination. The case was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

property

In this wrongful death lawsuit arising from a surgical complication during a polypectomy, the nonsettling defendant sought settlement credits under Chapter 33 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code based on a $200,000 settlement between one plaintiff and another defendant. The Supreme Court of Texas held that the record triggered a presumption entitling the nonsettling defendant to credits against the jury's awards because the remaining plaintiffs benefited from the settling plaintiff's proceeds. The court further ruled that the trial court must give the nonsettling plaintiffs an opportunity to demonstrate they did not benefit from the settlement. The court reversed the court of appeals' judgment and remanded the case for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a contract dispute between Jones Brothers Dirt & Paving Contractors and the Texas Department of Transportation over Jones's attempt to terminate a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise subcontractor on a federally funded road project. Jones was required under the contract to obtain approval from TxDOT's Business Opportunity Program Office before removal, but the BOP denied the request after finding insufficient evidence that the subcontractor was unwilling or unable to perform. Jones pursued administrative remedies under Texas Transportation Code section 201.112 to recover costs and liquidated damages, then filed suit raising both administrative review claims and original common-law breach of contract and declaratory judgment claims. The Supreme Court of Texas held that the Administrative Law Judge correctly applied a partiality, fraud, misconduct, or gross error standard to review the BOP decision and that section 201.112 provided the exclusive remedy, barring the common-law claims due to sovereign immunity. Accordingly, the court reversed the court of appeals on the common-law claims, dismissed them for lack of jurisdiction, and remanded the administrative claim for further proceedings.

business & regulatoryprocedure

This case involved a wrongful death lawsuit against the Texas Department of Transportation after a fatal car accident at an intersection where vandals had removed stop signs. The plaintiffs claimed the state's negligence in failing to address the repeated vandalism waived its immunity under the Texas Tort Claims Act. The trial court and court of appeals ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, but the Supreme Court of Texas reversed, holding that section 101.060(a)(3) of the Act applies to claims involving third-party removal of signs and requires actual notice to the state, which was not proven here. The court determined that a sign's vulnerability to vandalism does not constitute a "condition" under section 101.060(a)(2) that would waive immunity.

torts & liability

This case involved prospective buyers of a Texas car dealership who sued Ford Motor Company for tortious interference with their purchase contracts after Ford sought to exercise a contractual right of first refusal and assign it to another dealer; the buyers also sought declaratory relief and a temporary injunction, alleging that Ford's right violated provisions of the Texas Motor Vehicle Commission Code prohibiting manufacturers from blocking qualified transfers. The Texas Supreme Court held that the Texas Motor Vehicle Board has exclusive jurisdiction only over claims and issues directly governed by the Code, so the buyers were not required to exhaust administrative remedies before filing their tortious interference and declaratory judgment claims in court. However, the trial court was directed to abate those claims to permit the Board to exercise primary jurisdiction over the Code construction issue due to its expertise. The Court further concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the temporary injunction because the buyers showed a probable right to recovery and lacked an adequate legal remedy. The judgment of the court of appeals was reversed, and the case was remanded for further proceedings.

business & regulatoryproceduretorts & liability

This case involved a wrongful-death lawsuit arising from a fatal car accident at an intersection where vandals had removed the stop signs, leading to claims that the Texas Department of Transportation was negligent in maintaining them. The plaintiffs sued under the Texas Tort Claims Act, alleging that repeated vandalism created a "condition" that waived the state's sovereign immunity. The trial court entered judgment for the plaintiffs after a jury verdict, and the court of appeals affirmed, but the Texas Supreme Court reversed and rendered judgment that the plaintiffs take nothing. The Court held that the Act's specific provision on third-party removal or destruction of signs applies and requires actual notice of the signs' absence before the accident, which was lacking, and that susceptibility to repeated vandalism is not a "condition" under the other cited subsection.

torts & liabilityprocedure