Strasburger & Price is now known as Clark Hill Strasburger in Texas.Texas Supreme Court Denies Appeal in Strasburger Legal Mal Case
The order is a loss for Target Strike, a former client of Strasburger & Price and the Law Office of Donato D. Ramos.
June 24, 2019 at 04:04 PM
2 minute read
The Texas Supreme Court will not take up an appeal in a computer software company's legal malpractice case against Strasburger & Price, a smaller Texas law firm and three lawyers, making final an order in favor of the lawyers and their firms.
On Friday, the Texas high court issued an order denying a petition for review filed by Target Strike, a former client of the defendants.
In November 2018, the Texas Court of Appeals in Dallas affirmed a summary judgment in favor of Strasburger & Price—now Clark Hill Strasburger following a merger in 2018—along with former Strasburger partner Daniel Lanfear, The Law Office of Donato D. Ramos of Laredo, and lawyers Donato Ramos and Alfredo Ramon.
“We are pleased that this case is now fully behind us,” Daniel Butcher, a Clark Hill partner in Dallas who was managing partner of Strasburger & Price, said in a statement.
The lawyer representing the Ramos defendants in the appeal, Katherine Elrich of Cobb Martinez Woodward in Dallas, did not immediately return a call seeking a comment. Neither did John Martin, of counsel at Thompson & Knight in Dallas, who represents Strasburger & Price and Lanfear in the appeal.
Plaintiffs attorney David Kassab, of Kassab Law Firm in Houston, declined to comment on the case.
Target Strike, a former client of the defendants, sued the law firms in state district court in Dallas in 2014, alleging that the lawyers should have filed the underlying suit on Target Strike's behalf in Nevada instead of Texas. Target Strike alleged that its $161 million claim was destroyed because Texas had a shorter statute of limitations. The underlying suit was a breach-of-contract case that involved computer software used for mining minerals.
In 2015, a trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the firms and the lawyers. An appeals court in Dallas affirmed that judgment last year, finding that the lawyers' alleged failure to file in Nevada could not have caused Target Strike's injuries because the suit was “not proper in that forum.”
|Read More
Appeals Court Affirms Judgment in Strasburger & Price's Favor in Malpractice Suit
This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 All
From ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute read
DLA Piper Sued by 2 Houston Companies, Alleging a 'Fake Lawyer' Represented Them in Argentina
3 minute read
Trending Stories
- 1Weil Advances 18 to Partner, Largest Class Since 2021
- 2People and Purpose: AbbVie's GC on Leading With Impact and Inspiring Change
- 3Beef Between Two South Florida Law Firms Deepens With Suit Over Defamation
- 4Judge Skips Over Sanctions in Talc Bankruptcy: 'That’s A No'
- 5Hit by Mail Truck: Man Agrees to $1.85M Settlement for Spinal Injuries
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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
