Collection of a claim against a title company

The Firm obtained a money judgment for its client, and then in order to collect filed an abstract of judgment on certain real property owned by the judgment debtor. In connection with issuing its title policy for the judgment debtor’s acquisition of that property, the title company had failed to identify and inform the judgment debtor about the abstract of judgment recorded by the Firm. Consequently, at closing for that acquisition the judgment lien filed by the Firm on its client’s behalf was not paid off and remained an encumbrance on the title to the property. When the Firm sought to enforce the judgment lien, the title company had to defend the judgment debtor/property owner. As a defense, the title company asserted that the abstract of judgment as filed failed to reflect the current amount due on the judgment and refused to pay the claim. At trial, the Firm recovered the amount of its client’s judgment as well as attorneys’ fees. The title company appealed and lost.

Unlawful exaction by a municipality

The Firm’s client acquired two residential development lots with two partially completed houses situated on those lots. The client made application and paid the required permit fee to the municipality in order to obtain building permits to complete construction. The municipality refused to issue those permits, demanding instead reimbursement for a portion of the municipality’s cost to remediate a collapsed retaining wall in the adjacent park. The Firm first obtained a mandatory injunction ordering the municipality to issue the permits, and then at trial secured a money judgment against the municipality for the client’s damages incurred by the delay to complete the houses. The municipality appealed and lost.

Defense against a debt collection creditor

The Firm’s client was sued by a debt collection creditor that purchases past due debts from banks and other lenders, and then seeks to collect on those debts. In this case the debt was in the form of a judgment against the client’s son. The creditor alleged that a bank’s lien had been invalidly assigned, a subsequent foreclosure based on that lien was invalid, and the client’s actions involving documents recorded in connection with that foreclosure constituted fraud. The Firm prevailed at a jury trial. The collection company initially appealed, and then withdrew its appeal before any briefing occurred.

Successful settlement of a utility sharing agreement dispute

This lawsuit stemmed from a dispute between the separate owners of two adjacent large commercial buildings. Those buildings, which were previously under common ownership, shared common sources for their utilities. The two owners disagreed as to their respective rights and obligations under a utility sharing agreement The Firm obtained a favorable settlement for its client with both the other building owner and the client’s lender.

Defense against an attempt to hold a former corporate officer liable

The Firm’s client was a shareholder, officer, and director of a company. The plaintiff was the only other shareholder. Both shareholders contributed substantial working capital to the company. After the company filed for bankruptcy, the other shareholder sued the Firm’s client, alleging in part an agreement between the two shareholders to make equal capital contributions. The Firm’s motion for summary judgment was successful as to all claims against its client. The other shareholder appealed and lost.

2706 Fairmount St., Dallas, TX 75201

| Telephone: 214.521.4994
| Fax: 214.521.3838