Appellants, Heritage Communities, Inc. (HCI), Heritage Magnolia North, Inc. (HMNI), and BuildStar Corporation (BuildStar) (collectively, Appellants), seek review of the jury's verdict in this construction defect action.[1] Appellants assign error to the trial court's: (1) finding of an amalgamation of Appellants' corporate interests, entities, and activities so as to blur the legal distinction b

Appellants, Noe Garza and Noe Garza Engineering, Inc. (collectively “Garza Engineering”), appeal from the denial of their motion to dismiss the lawsuit that appellees, Joe and Celina Carmona (collectively “Carmonas”), filed against them. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 150.002(f) (West 2011) (authorizing immediate interlocutory appeal from an order denying a motion to dismiss under

Joseph W. Sarno appeals from a take-nothing judgment rendered after a nonjury trial on his lawsuit against his former attorney, Marsaw & Associates PC and Terry Marsaw (collectively, Marsaw). Because all dispositive issues are settled in law, we issue this memorandum opinion. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(a), 47.4. We affirm.

Background

On October 4, 1998, Dallas police officers a

This case involves allegations of fraud and misrepresentation in the issuance of securities related to oil and gas interests. Following a jury verdict for plaintiffs, defendants-appellants/cross-appellees Ohio Kentucky Oil Corporation (“OKO”) and Carol L. Campbell, both individually and as executrix of the Estate of William M. Griffith, appeal numerous rulings of the district court. Plaintiffs

The self-represented plaintiff, Li Li, appeals from the summary judgment rendered by the trial court in favor of the defendants, Canberra Industries, Packard BioScience (Packard), Perkin-Elmer Life Sciences, Darren Lee, Roberta Tyska (formerly Roberta Kuhn), Mark Schmeizl, Wayne Richardson, Eugene Della Vecchia, Richard McKernan and Emery G. Olcott. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court e

The defendants, State National Insurance Company (State National) and First Mercury Insurance Company (First Mercury), appeal from the judgment rendered by the trial court in favor of the plaintiff, Attorney Maurizio D. Lancia, on Lancia’s claim of breach of contract based on the defendants’ failure and refusal to defend him, under a liability insurance policy issued to his law firm, in four u

¶1 This certiorari proceeding concerns medical malpractice claims that plaintiff asserted against the medical providers who were involved in the cancer diagnosis of his prostate, the surgery to remove it and his subsequent treatment. The trial court has twice rendered judgments in favor of the defendants. The first round of judgments were reversed by Division IV of the Court of Civil Appeals in t

¶ 1 Plaintiff, David Ahle, appeals from an order of the circuit court of Madison County
entering summary judgment in favor of defendant, D. Chandler, Inc. On appeal, plaintiff
argues the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of defendant. We reverse
and remand.
¶ 2 BACKGROUND
¶ 3 On August 9, 2007, plaintiff was involved in an automobile accident with a Piz

Norris J. DeVoll appeals a judgment rendered against him, and in favor of Rebecca Demonbreun and William Dowds, under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (DTPA). Because we conclude the evidence is sufficient to support the jury’s findings, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

FACTS

This case arises out of the sale of a home and adjoining piece of prop

Appellants Rodney E. Donkin, Jr. and Vicki Donkin are successor trustees of the Donkin Family Trust dated August 15, 1988 (Trust), which was created by Rodney Donkin, Sr. and Mary Donkin. The Trust contains a ―no contest‖ clause disinheriting any beneficiary who challenges the Trust, its provisions, or its asset distribution. In 2009, two of the beneficiaries, Annemarie Donkin and Lisa Donkin

The owner of a yacht sued the manufacturer of the yacht’s engines and the manufacturer’s subsidiary, asserting various claims for damages allegedly suffered as a result of major engine failure. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the vessel’s owner on his claim for breach of the implied warranty of merchantability. On appeal, the vessel owner asserts that the trial court erred in grantin

The principal issue presented in this appeal concerns the power of courts to disregard the separate existence of a Texas limited liability company (LLC) under the equitable "veil-piercing" principles that have evolved in regard to business corporations. Specifically, we must determine whether, assuming these principles can be applied to LLCs, a claimant seeking to "pierce" an LLC's "veil" with res

Appellants, Aspen Technology, Inc. and David Woodruff, appeal from the trial court’s denial of their motion to abate the trial and compel arbitration. In one issue, Aspen Technology and Woodruff argue that the trial court erred in denying their motion.

We reverse and remand. Background

C.A., a minor, sued his public high school guidance counselor and the school district for damages arising out of sexual harassment and abuse by the counselor. The trial court sustained the school district’s demurrer, and the Court of Appeal affirmed. On review, the question presented is whether the district may be found vicariously liable for the acts of its employees (Gov. Code, § 815.2)1—no

Barry F. Miller and Maria J. Miller appeal a summary judgment granted to LandAmerica Lawyers Title of El Paso. In two issues for review, they urge that there are material fact issues regarding their action for negligent misrepresentation and regarding their action for deceptive trade practices. We affirm.

Facts

In 2006, the Millers purchased land in El Paso County, Texa

¶1 This certiorari proceeding concerns medical malpractice claims that plaintiff asserted against the medical providers who were involved in the cancer diagnosis of his prostate, the surgery to remove it and his subsequent treatment. The trial court has twice rendered judgments in favor of the defendants. The first round of judgments were reversed by Division IV of the Court of Civil Appeals in t

We are asked in this appeal to determine whether Lori Wigod has stated claims under Illinois law against her home mortgage servicer for refusing to modify her loan pursuant to the federal Home Affordable Mortgage Program (HAMP). The U.S. Department of the Treasury implemented HAMP to help homeowners avoid foreclosure amidst the sharp decline in the nation’s housing market in 2008. In 2009, Wells

This is a dispute concerning cementing services provided on an oil well. Plaintiff Arnold Oil Properties, LLC, (“Arnold”) hired Defendant Schlumberger Technology Corp. (“Schlumberger”) to perform a specialized cement job on its deep-zone gas well. After Schlumberger poured too much cement into the well, Arnold sued for breach of contract and negligence. The district court concluded as a ma

Mark Edward Thompson sued Stillwater Extreme, STillwater Xtreme.com, LLC and Jack McBride on a breach of contract, Fraud, breach of warranty, and misrepresentation theories claiming that he purchased a 2007 Honda CRF from Defendant for $3,750 but Defendant failed to produce a "clean" title for the motorcycle.

Defendants admitted that Plaintiff purchased the motorcycle in question and admitt

Thomas Mundy (Mundy) and attorney Morse Mehrban (Mehrban) appeal from the denial of Mundy‘s special motion to strike pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.161 and from the award of attorney fees to respondent Laura D. Lenc (Lenc). In the published portion of this opinion, we affirm the order denying the special motion to strike as it pertains to Lenc‘s cause of action for breach of t

Appellant Glen Oaks Homeowners Association (the HOA) appeals from judgments entered against it after the trial court sustained demurrers to its first amended complaint (FAC). Respondents are two groups of realtors: (1) Loeffler and Bathke Properties Realtors, Inc., doing business as Re/Max Premier Properties, Inc., Priscilla Siew-Lin Yim, and Margaret M. Huang; and (2) DG Real Estate, Inc. (errone

Defendant Trancos, Inc. (Trancos) appeals from a judgment awarding statutory damages and attorney fees to plaintiff Daniel Balsam under Business and Professions Code1 section 17529 et seq. (Anti-spam Law). Balsam cross-appeals from portions of the judgment denying him relief under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Civil Code section 1750 et seq. (CLRA), and finding Trancos‘s chief executive offi

This case raises the question of whether the putative father of a child, upon learning that he was deceived by his wife, the child’s mother, and the child’s biological father as to the child’s paternity, is estopped from recovering from the biological father funds that the putative father expended to raise the child while believing her to be his offspring. The plaintiff, Eric Fischer, appeal

The petitioner, Lachlan MacLearn, and the intervenor, Simon Hutchings (together, the appellants), appeal an order of the Superior Court (Abramson, J.) denying Hutchings’ motion for summary judgment and granting summary judgment in favor of the respondent, Commerce Insurance Company (Commerce). We affirm.

The trial court found or the record supports the following facts. Lachlan MacLearn an

Plaintiffs Bob Conrad, David Graas, Sean Krider, Sy Duc Tran, Kevin Starkey, Joseph Dudley, Alan Gelfand, Anthony Gardner, Scott Florez, Kyle Hoffecker, Daniel Delgado, Richard Gorospe, Nicholas Spagnoletti, Gregory Cadman, Ecliff Jackman, Dane McIntosh, Lance Bredefeld, Deana Crawford, Randall Stuewe, Swen Wust, and Ghassan Daher, on behalf of themselves and the other members of the below-defined