Recognizing that a case is not won or lost when the jury verdict comes in, and in a departure from most firms our size, from its founding SB&L has maintained a dedication to appellate practice. SB&L’s appellate lawyers have a successful record in post-trial matters and appeals, including the preparation and presentation of motions, writs, briefs and arguments in both state and federal appellate courts. In addition to appeals of cases the firm has tried, SB&L’s appellate lawyers have been retained to step in and handle appeals in cases tried by other law firms. When appropriate, our appellate lawyers become involved in a case long before the actual trial to assist in pre-trial matters, trial matters, research of legal issues, preparation of trial briefs, preservation of error, and jury charge preparation.
Representative Cases:
- Able Supply Co. v. Moye, 898 S.W.2d 766 (Tex. 1995) (landmark discovery abuse case);
- Avdeef v. Rockline Indus., 554 F. App’x 269 (5th Cir. 2014) (affirming res judicata dismissal)
- Brown v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp., 909 S.W.2d 101 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1995) (clarifying procedure for making challenges to potential jurors for cause);
- Cimino v. Raymark Indus., 739 F. Supp. 328, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7224, CCH Prod. Liab. Rep. P12772 (E.D. Tex. 1990) (extrapolated class action);
- Click v. Owens Corning Fiberglas, Corp., 899 S.W. 2d 376 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1995) (product exposure);
- Dartez v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 910 F.2d 1291 (5th Cir.1990) (landmark products liability evidentiary standard)
- Diamond Offshore Mgmt. Co. v. Guidry, 171 S.W.3d 840 (Tex. 2005) (Jury charge in Jones Act case);
- Gaudette v. Conn Appliances, Inc., 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 7315, 2007 WL 2493437 (Tex. App.—Beaumont, Sept. 6, 2007)
- Graffagnino v. Fibreboard Corp., 776 F.2d 1307 (5th Cir.1985) (construction and operation of release);
- In re: Fibreboard Corp., 893 F.2d 706 (5th Cir.1990) (innovative class action);
- In re: Global Sante Fe Corp., 275 S.W.3d 477 (Tex. 2008) (addressing preemption and applicability of asbestos/silica tort reform statute in Jones Act case)
- International Dairy Queen, Inc. v. Matthews, 126 S.W.3d 629 (Tex. App.- Beaumont 2004) (attorney ad litem fees);
- Keene Corporation v. Caldwell, 840 S.W.2d 715 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1992) (mandamus granted to protect defendant’s claims of attorney-client and attorney work product privileges);
- Keene Corporation v. Wittig, 855 S.W.2d 280 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1993) (mandamus issued to prevent trial court from enforcing improper discovery order);
- Kirby Forest Industries v. Kirkland, 772 S.W.2d 226 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1989) (defines premises owner’s right of control over independent contractor and duties);
- Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co. v. Crane, 898 S.W.2d 944 (Tex. App.-Beaumont 1995) (reversing award of punitive damages in insurance bad faith lawsuit);
- Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Estate of Burt, 897 S.W.2d 765 (Tex. 1995) (announcing rule for accrual of prejudgment interest in latent disease cases); and
- Srite v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 870 S.W.2d 556 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1993) (affirming jury finding of zero damages).