A string of three losses over the past three months have ended with orders for litigious Texas oil and gas heir Albert G. Hill III to pay attorney fees to winning defendants at whom he lobbed lawsuits.

Hill lost his appeal in litigation with his sisters over a dispute about their father's will. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit sent the matter back to a district court, which will determine whether his sisters are entitled to additional costs and fees, said the Feb. 4 opinion in Hill v. Washburne.

Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan wrote the opinion, joined by Chief Judge Priscilla Owen and Judge Rhesa Hawkins Barksdale.

The siblings have been embroiled in litigation since 2007 over disputes about trusts formed by their great-grandfather, Texas oil baron H.L. Hunt, one of the world's richest men when he died in 1974, said the opinion. This is the fifth time that parts of the dispute have reached the Fifth Circuit.

The current appeal deals with a settlement agreement in which Hill got a nine-figure payment, and promised he would not contest his father's will. But when the father, Albert, died, Hill did file a challenge in probate court, arguing about irregularities in signatures on the will, and claiming his father didn't actually execute it.

Hill's sisters, Heather Washburne, Elisa Summers and Margaret Keliher, won their arguments in the district court for enforcement of the settlement agreement. The trial court granted an injunction in December 2018 to stop Hill's challenge to the will, and he appealed the injunction.

Because of decisions in other courts in the litigation, the Fifth Circuit dismissed most of the appeal as moot. But the ruling did decide one of Hill's challenges about whether the injunction can stop Hill from challenging his dad's will ever again in any court.

"These challenges all fail," the opinion said.

Previously, Hill had violated the settlement agreement at least seven times, it said. The district court found that Hill had no right to proceed in the litigation because the settlement agreement barred his will contest, and that an injunction was necessary to enforce the agreement, the opinion noted.

"The public interest favors enforcing the no-contest provision according to its terms," the opinion said. "The sisters correctly note that Texas favors the validity and enforcement of settlement agreements.More importantly, public interest favors disallowing vexatious litigation."

The Fifth Circuit's ruling means that Hill can never contest his father's will in any manner in any court. The court also remanded the matter to the district court to determine if the sisters are entitled to additional costs and fees.

"Mrs. Washburne and Mrs. Summers are pleased with the ruling of the court," said their attorney, Tom Dees, shareholder in Hallett & Perrin in Dallas.

McGuireWoods partner Tom Farrell of Houston, who represents Hill, didn't return a call or email seeking comment before deadline. Neither did Locke Lord partner Scott Hastings of Dallas, who represents Keliher.

|

Hills losses in state court

In recent months, Hill has also seen adverse rulings in two lawsuits in Harris County District Courts that claimed that different sets of defendants conspired to bring false criminal charges against Hill by influencing Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins to indict him.

In one of those matters, his sisters, and other defendants, in December 2019 won the dismissal of Hill's claims against them after arguing successfully that the Texas Citizens Participation Act, which allows for the dismissal of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, or SLAPP lawsuits, protected them from his claims. The law puts Hill on the hook for paying the defendants' costs and attorney fees. The rest of the lawsuit was moved to Dallas County, where Hill is still suing former DA Craig Watkins, and former prosecutors Terri Moore and Russell Wilson.

In the other lawsuit, Hill must also pay costs and fees for a number of high-profile attorneys who were dismissed as defendants late last year after a judge found that the anti-SLAPP law protected them.

Related stories: