Dallas Austin

In yet another appeal of a nuclear verdict, the Texas Supreme Court recently remanded a $13.7 million verdict on the basis that the trial court may have used the wrong definition of “employee” and insufficient evidence supported piercing the veil of 3 separate corporations. In JNM Express, LLC, ANCA Transport, Inc., Omega Freight Logistics, LLC, Jorge Marin, and Silvia Marin v. Lauro Lozano Jr. and Irene Lozano, Mr. Lozano, an independent contractor truck driver, sued three related corporations alleging each was his employer. Each corporation had common ownership by Jorge and Silvia Marin,

A legal attempt to prevent enforcement of the $17.20 per hour minimum wage for federal contracts has recently failed.  How will that impact you? Arkansas Valley Adventure LLC (“AVA”) and the Colorado River Outfitters Association (“CROA”) filed suit in US Court in Colorado requesting an injunction of a 2021 Executive Order increasing minimum wage for certain categories of federal work to $15 per hour. In April 2024, the US 10th Circuit Court of Appeals denied their request, finding that the 2021 Executive Order has a nexus close enough to promoting economy and efficiency in federal pro

A Texas federal court recently held that an additional insured lacked standing to file an independent claim against an insurer.  In Antares Underwriting, Ltd. v. Magellan E&P Holdings, Magellan entered into an Emergency Agreement with Great White Well Control (“GWWC”) to provide well control services.  The Agreement had an effective date of September 1, 2020. Antares Underwriting Limited (“Antares”) issued an energy policy to Magellan with a policy term of June 30, 2020 to June 30, 2021.  When GWWC made a claim for additional insured coverage under the energy policy, Antares den

On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued its final version of Rules Concerning Unfair Methods of Competition (Rule).  The Rule becomes effective 120 days after being published in the Federal Register.  Almost immediately, two separate lawsuits were filed in Texas seeking to stay enforcement of the Rule and a finding that the FTC exceeded its authority in issuing the Rule.  Why all the fuss? The Rule, only 9 pages long, is preceded by 560 pages of commentary and justification by the FTC, perhaps foreboding the Rule’s significance and controversy. The Rule bars an employ

Michael Chiles was working at an oil and gas processing facility in West Texas when pressurized fluid unexpectedly shot out of the end of a hose he was carrying. Chiles was thrown to the ground and taken to the hospital shortly thereafter, where he was diagnosed with a torn rotator cuff that required two separate surgeries to repair. Chiles sued Priority Artificial Lift Services, LLC (“Priority”) and EP Energy E&P Company, L.P. (“EP Energy”) for damages caused by the incident. The parties proceeded to trial and the jury returned a verdict finding Priority and EP Energy liable for C

On January 1, 2024, an important change in the Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”) took effect. This change created ownership reporting requirements for private companies. Specifically, all entities, except sole proprietorships, some general partnerships, wealth planning trusts, unincorporated entities, and foreign entities not registered to do business in the United States, have to report to the federal government who the beneficial owners of the entity are. A beneficial owner includes anyone who exercises substantial control over the entity or owns or controls twenty-five percent or more

In March 2024, the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in the matter of Yarbrough v. Glow Networks, Inc. overturned a $70 million employment discrimination verdict and ordered a new trial for two claims relating to only two specific Plaintiffs.  How did this happen? In December 2019, fourteen former employees of Glow Networks, Inc. (“Glow”), 13 of whom are Black, filed suit against their former employer for racial discrimination in the workplace. All Plaintiffs but one alleged racial discrimination based on tangible actions and/or a hostile work environment. Some Plaintiff