Description: This case is a breach of contract case between a large electric power company and the City of Brownsville, Texas. Heygood, Orr & Pearson represents the City of Brownsville, which filed suit against AEP, seeking more than $40 million in damages for breach of a contract to sell an ownership interest in an electric power plant. AEP argued that the City had released all of its claims in a Termination Agreement and Releases it was forced to sign in order to close the transaction. The City argued that the agreement only released claims for breach of the parties’ 1985 Participation Agreement and not claims for breach of the entirely separate Purchase and Sale Agreement that the City alleged AEP had breached by improperly delaying the sale of the power plant. The trial judge agreed with AEP and granted summary judgment on all of the City’s claims. On appeal, the Dallas Court of Appeals reversed, finding that the agreement did not release the claims at issue, thereby restoring the City’s claims. AEP then appealed to the Texas Supreme Court and Heygood, Orr & Pearson filed this Response. The parties are currently awaiting a ruling.

This case was a wrongful death claim arising out of the death of Janice DiCosolo due to her use of a defective fentanyl pain patch designed, manufactured and marketed by Defendants. After the DiCosolo family obtained an $18.5 judgment, the Defendants appealed. They claim that the verdict was excessive, that Plaintiff’s counsel made an improper closing argument, that the trial court erred in excluding evidence of other drugs the decedent may have taken and that the Plaintiff failed to prove the existence of a non-specific defect. The Court of Appeals rejected all of the Defendants’ argument and affirmed the judgment. The Defendants then appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court by filing a Petition for Leave to Appeal. This Brief is the response to that Petition.

This brief was filed in the Dallas Court of Appeals in response to an appellate brief filed by the Defendants at trial. The Defendants were appealing a $1.2M verdict obtained by Heygood, Orr & Pearson against a property owner and property manager for the death of a young girl struck and killed by a pickup truck while crossing an apartment parking lot. The issues in the appeal included issues of negligence, causation, respondeat superior liability, the existence of duties to licensees and invitees, allocation of liability, joint and several liability and the allegedly improper admission of evidence.

This case involved the breach of a high-low agreement entered into during trial. Following the verdict, the defendant refused to pay the amount due under the agreement. The plaintiff sued. Both parties sought summary judgment. The trial court granted summary judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant appealed.

This is a medical malpractice case in which the trial court denied the hospitals’ plea to the jurisdiction based on sovereign immunity. The hospital appealed. The issue was whether the prescription of a dangerous drug constituted the use of tangible personal property.