HOUSTON - Today, the 14th Court of Appeals affirmed a $5.8 million final judgment against CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric in litigation brought over a property fire.
Following a fire that destroyed buildings, equipment and vehicles, CenterPoint was sued by Howard Coleman and his business, Coleman Upholstery, for allegedly negligently failing to maintain an electrical transformer.
After a jury found CenterPoint’s negligence proximately caused Coleman’s damages, the trial court remitted a portion of the damages and entered a final judgment awarding Coleman $5,835,044.49 plus postjudgment interest, according to the 14th Court’s opinion.
Both sides appealed.
On appeal, CenterPoint argued that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Coleman failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with the Public Utility Commission (PUC) before filing this lawsuit. CenterPoint also challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury’s findings and the amount of damages awarded by the trial court. Lastly, CenterPoint argued the trial court erred in overruling its objections to certain evidence relating to alleged injury to personal and business credit, the 14th Court’s opinion states.
In one cross-appeal issue, Coleman asserted that the trial court erred in remitting a portion of the damages found by the jury.
Court records show Coleman’s technical expert generally asserted that CenterPoint’s failure to properly install, inspect, maintain, repair, and replace its equipment proximately caused the fire.
At trial, the jury found CenterPoint’s negligence proximately caused the occurrence, awarding Coleman $3,633,917 for past lost profits, $803,957 for past property damage, $450,000 for past damage to personal and business credit and $50,000 for future damage to personal and business credit.
Court records show CenterPoint moved for a remittitur of lost profits damages. The trial court then suggested a remittitur, which Coleman accepted while preserving the right to appeal. The remittitur reduced the amount of lost profits damages to $2,763,435.
In an amended final judgment, the trial court awarded Coleman a total of $5,835,044.49 in damages and prejudgment interest plus post-judgment interest.
Justices found that CenterPoint failed to establish that the evidence was legally or factually insufficient to support the jury’s finding that CenterPoint breached a duty of care owed to Coleman.
The 14th Court further concluded that the evidence was factually sufficient to support the trial court’s award of $2,763,435 in lost profits damages.
Justices also held that PUC does not have exclusive original jurisdiction over the underlying issues in this case by express grant or under the Texas Public Utility Regulatory Act’s pervasive regulatory system.
“Accordingly, Coleman was not required to exhaust any administrative remedies and the trial court possessed subject matter jurisdiction over Coleman’s claims,” the opinion states.
On Coleman’s issue, the 14th Court found that he failed to establish that the trial court erred in ordering a remittitur of lost profits damages.
Case No. 14-20-00250-CV