BEAUMONT – An appellate court has reversed local attorney Brent Coon’s summary judgment win in a malpractice lawsuit accusing him of mishandling a 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill claim.
Seeking treble and exemplary damages, Nicholas Marteny filed suit against Coon and his firm in April 2017, accusing the attorney of breach of fiduciary duty and deceptive trade practices.
Marteny, a merchant marine who has worked offshore since 2005, contends his “viable claims” against BP were lost due to Coon’s “failure to file and prosecute the claims within the applicable deadlines.”
“Thereafter, defendants concealed their malpractice and led plaintiff on to believe his case was ongoing even after it had been … dismissed,” the suit states.
Following the oil spill, the moratorium drastically reduced the amount of work available on gulf vessels, leading Marteny to be discharged.
In June 2011, he contracted with Coon and his firm, Brent Coon & Associates, to represent him in his claims against BP.
In January 2012, Coon attempted “but purportedly failed” to file a presentment claim form under the Oil Pollution Act, demanding BP compensate Marteny $162,445.20 for damages related to the oil spill.
Because the claim was never timely filed, the claim was denied on June 13, 2012, court records show
In his suit, Marteny says he became so “frustrated” with Coon’s “lack of communication” that he terminated his firm as his counsel on June 25, 2012.
However, on Nov. 20, 2012, he canceled the withdraw request and Coon agreed to continue as his attorney.
“Between 2013 to early 2015, defendants led Marteny on to believe that his claims against BP were still valid and being pursued,” the suit states. “Eventually Marteny became tired of defendants’ lack of communication and retained another lawyer.”
After a review, Marteny’s new lawyer determined that not only had Coon never submitted a registration form to the Gulf Coast Claims Facility, but he and his firm failed to properly submit and prosecute a claim with the settlement program.
On April 6, 2018, Coon filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing Marteny was not entitled to recover for his moratorium losses because a MDL court ruled BP was not responsible under the Oil Pollution Act for economic loss that resulted from the moratorium.
Court records show Judge Justin Sanderson, 60th District Court, granted Coon’s motion for summary judgment without ruling on Marteny’s pending motion to compel written discovery, dismissing Marteny’s claims.
On Appeal, Marteny questioned whether Sanderson erred by granting Coon summary judgment based on lack of duty and damages; whether the trial court abused its discretion by implicitly denying the motion to compel discovery; and whether the trial court abused its discretion by implicitly denying the motion to continue the summary judgment hearing so he could obtain additional discovery.
On Sept. 24, the Ninth Court of Appeals found that Coon failed to carry his burden as a traditional summary judgment movant to conclusively negate the challenged elements of duty and damages in the legal malpractice case.
“Because genuine issues of material fact remain, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment,” the opinion states. “We reverse and remand Marteny’s legal malpractice claim.”
Coon is represented by Eric Newell.
Houston attorney Lance Kassab represent Marteny.
Appeals case No. 09-19-00019-CV