Texas Business Courts: The Next Frontier in Business Litigation
"The expected benefit and overarching goal of the Business Courts is to provide a more efficient and predictable forum for larger, more complex civil litigation facing Texas businesses," write Nathan Cox and R. Heath Cheek.
June 25, 2024 at 10:00 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
Although Texas has long championed itself as the best state for businesses—based on surveys, number of corporate relocations, and the number of Fortune 500 companies in Texas—Texas lagged other business-friendly states (namely Delaware) in having a specialized business court system. Approximately half of states have some form of specialized business court (including the well-known Delaware Court of Chancery). The Texas Legislature believed that establishing specialized business courts would lead to more consistent, timing rulings and efficient, cost-effective (relatively speaking) litigation, thus, creating another reason for businesses to relocate to Texas. Accordingly, the Texas Legislature enacted House Bill 19 in 2023, creating the Business Courts, dedicated to a narrow subset of complex, civil litigation involving business disputes (e.g., shareholder derivative suits, corporate governance, securities claims, fraudulent real estate transactions, UCC claims, and many more) with a lot at stake (a minimum amount in controversy between $5 and $10 million depending on the cause of action). However, there is one notable exception: There is no amount in controversy requirement for lawsuits involving public companies concerning more internally focused business disputes (e.g., derivative suits, receiverships, corporate governance, fiduciary duties, etc.). Tex. Gov't Code Ann. Section 25A.004(b). HB 19 marks one of the largest reforms of the Texas court system in a generation. It affects all litigation filed after Sept. 1.
In most counties, a Texas district court judge must be a generalist out of necessity because they cover civil, family, probate and criminal cases. (We vividly remember arguing a hearing regarding a complex "tag along rights" transaction in a private equity deal to a judge with a general docket, whose pre-judicial career was exclusively in family law.)
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFed Judiciary Panel Mulls Authority to Ban In-State Bar Admission Requirements
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250