On July 5th I wrote that conservatives remembered what the left had done to Judge Robert Bork and believed Judge Brett Kavanaugh would be a just appointment to the seat Bork was denied. The extreme efforts to stop his nomination confirm that the left was determined to prevent that from happening. Of course, at the end of the day the ferocity of the opposition to this appointment illustrates the outsized power the court has assumed in our country. The fear of losing the power of the court as their vanguard, of the gavel being in the hand of others, explains the lefts willingness to “do anything” to defeat the nomination. Indeed, some even suggested Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley was not qualified to lead the committee because he is not a lawyer. The fact is Senator Grassley has as many hours in law school as Senator Feinstein, the ranking minority member.
In the Trump administration, at least, the government will no longer look the other way as asbestos lawyers negotiate lenient terms that make it easy for their current clients to get money at the expense of future claimants and federal entitlement programs.
Judge dismisses Dallas tax attorney's $5 million discrimination suit against Georgetown University over job fair ban
DALLAS – A federal judge earlier this month dismissed the case of a Dallas-based international tax attorney who sued a Washington, D.C. university, his alma mater, he claimed discriminated against him when it banned his firm from attending a job fair following "mischaracterized information" on his resume.
WASHINGTON – Three indexing software patents allegedly infringed by a Wisconsin-based party supply company are invalid because they only contain abstract ideas, a federal appeals court ruled in an East Texas case earlier this month.
When it hired outside lawyers to represent it in lawsuits against the opioid industry, Harris County agreed to pay a contingency fee of 35%, more than double the rate in Dallas County and equal to the highest in the state.
HOUSTON – A motorist alleges a postal service employee failed to maintain in his lane and struck his vehicle in Humble.
SHERMAN – A federal defamation lawsuit asserts that Charles Schwab Corp. was influenced by negative media reports about Chapwood Capital Investment Management, LLC in its decision to sever its professional relationship with the suburban Dallas-based firm.
As the Senate begins another round of debates on whether to appoint a Presidential nominee to the high court, the country deserves a continued debate on the proper role of the courts in our republic. During the last Presidential election Donald Trump campaigned on appointing judges who would follow in the mold of Antonin Scalia. In recent times, the democrats have argued that judges should apply something of an empathy standard when interpreting the constitution, creating a sort of living constitution to keep up with the times.
ST. LOUIS – Jurors on July 12 handed Johnson & Johnson a body-blow, levying a total $4.14 billion in punitive damages and $550 million in compensatory damages to 22 women who claimed its talcum powder contained asbestos that caused them to develop ovarian cancer.
As the President considers a new judge to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy he would do well to remember that the Kennedy seat was supposed to go to Judge Robert Bork, a good man who was unjustly attacked and precluded from sitting on the Supreme Court. Conservatives have long recognized Bork should have had that spot.
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court recently released a court opinion to uphold the majority of Texas’ House and Congressional district maps, ending the years-long debate over whether Texas’ legislatures intentionally drew districts to discriminate against minorities.
DALLAS – Because Purdue Pharma “made billions” selling opioids, “why the heck should it not pay for creating this epidemic” – that was the rhetorical question offered by attorney Jay Henderson, who represents numerous Texas counties currently engrossed in opioid litigation, at a recent conference.
A dissident emerges in Pennsylvania's opioid litigation: Lehigh Co. claims its case has been highjacked
The fight for control of Pennsylvania’s opioid litigation is not over, as Lehigh County is not happy that its case has been grouped in with more than 30 others and that lawyers it previously rejected have been tasked with overseeing the proceedings.
The concept of written legal rules—of the law itself—assumes that their content is fixed and ascertainable. The rule of law likewise depends on citizens having advance notice of what they can and cannot do, pursuant to clear, knowable directives. Legal scholars expend enormous energy pontificating about the appropriate techniques judges should apply in the course of constitutional interpretation: textualism, originalism, and so forth. Libertarian theorists argue strenuously that judges must be given greater authority—through “judicial engagement”—over the political branches. Each day, lawyers across the country trot off to court, briefs in hand, hoping to convince a black-robed judge–enthroned behind a raised, magisterial bench—that the relevant legal rules, properly construed, compel a ruling in favor of their client.
Appeals court reverses $8 million jury award against DuPont, saying cancer victim shall 'take nothing'
DALLAS – A Texas man who received a multimillion dollar jury award in 2015 after his leukemia was found to have been caused by years of exposure to benzene in the paints and paint thinners he used on the job will receive nothing, a state appeals court ruled earlier this month.
DALLAS – SightLine Health LLC has agreed to pay $11.5 million to settle a False Claims Act lawsuit over allegations it violated the Anti-Kickback Statute regarding Medicare.
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court confirmed federal jurisdiction in Texas’ lawsuit against New Mexico on March 5, ordering the case involving water rights to the Rio Grande River to be remanded back to the Special Master.
AUSTIN – Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is challenging a U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas ruling that declared Texas district maps were drawn with the intent to discriminate against minorities.
Rarely do challengers of landmark legislation get a second bite at the apple in constitutional litigation. Thanks to some enterprising state attorneys general, however, champions of limited government may have another chance to overturn the signature overreach of the Obama Administration. Six years after Obamacare was initially upheld, opponents of the law (technically “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” or “ACA”) are preparing a second test case, based—ironically enough—on the implausible rationale of the initial ruling.
My law school years (1977-80) at the University of Texas were, in hindsight, close to idyllic. I loved my first-year professors, tuition at UT was dirt cheap, Austin was a wonderful place to live, and I reveled in the “college town” ambience, which was new to me. (Prior to arriving at UT, I had never attended a college football game. During my first year—when the Longhorns went undefeated in the regular season and Earl Campbell won the Heisman Trophy–I had season tickets on the 50-yard line at UT’s gigantic Memorial Stadium, for a pittance that even a broke law student could afford.) The post-game victory spectacle—honking horns on the Drag and the Tower lit up in orange—formed indelible memories.