From the monthly archives: April, 2015
We are pleased to present below all posts archived in 'April, 2015'. If you still can't find what you are looking for, try using the search box.
In Campbell Harrison & Dagley, LLP v. Hill
, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals analyzed the trial court's order that vacated most of an arbitration award. The arbitrators awarded the law firms their fees, based upon a hybrid hourly-rate fee (approximately $3.15 million) and a contingency fee (approximately $25 million). The district court vacated the arbitrators' award of the contingency fee, which was challenged on appeal to the Fifth Circuit. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals examined the Texas General Arbitration Act, as well as Hill's claim that the contingency award was unconscionable. Concluding that the district court substituted its judgment for that of the arbitrators, the Fifth Circuit upheld the hourly-rate fee and reversed and rendered the contingency fee award in favor of the law firms.
Launched in July, 2014, we've now reached our 50th blog post on mediation and arbitration.
Though relatively new, the Texas Bar Today recognized one of our blogs as a "Top 10 Blog Posts".
This blog was created to keep our members and the public informed of important developments in the area of mediation, arbitration, and other ADR-related matters. We don't blog about every court decision that is issued, but we try to blog about the important ones. We also blog about interesting developments from practitioners so that arbitrations, mediations, and other ADR-related procedures can continue to develop.
If you know of an important case, or a topical blog that we should know about, please send a summary (with a link) to our blog editor, Gene Roberts.
In G.T. Leach Builders, LLC v. Sapphire V.P., LP
, the Texas Supreme Court examined whether a property developer must arbitrate its claims against several defendants involved in a construction project. The trial court denied all of the defendants' motions to compel arbitration and that decision was affirmed by the court of appeals. The Texas Supreme Court held that the developer must arbitrate its claims against the general contractor, but not against the other defendants because there was an arbitration agreement between the general and the developer, but not with the other defendants. This decision discusses the law on waiver of the right to arbitrate, as well as an analysis relating to the deadline for arbitration.