HOUSTON, Aug. 29 /PRNewswire/ -- The litigation boutique, Susman Godfrey
L.L.P., won three different appeals for three different clients in three
different opinions issued by the Texas Supreme Court today.
In the first case, Forest Oil Corporation, et al. v. James Argyle McAllen,
et al., the Texas Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and remanded the
case to the trial court with instructions to compel arbitration in accordance
with the parties' written agreement. The plaintiffs, Mr. McAllen and others,
had ignored their written agreement to pursue their claims in an arbitration
in Houston, Texas, and, instead, had filed a lawsuit in state court in
McAllen, Hidalgo County, Texas, in the city named after Mr. McAllen's
ancestors.
Susman Godfrey partner Geoffrey L. Harrison argued the case in the Supreme
Court on behalf of Forest Oil back in October 2007. Mr. Harrison urged the
Supreme Court to enforce an arbitration agreement contained in the parties'
years-earlier settlement agreement. Mr. Harrison argued that an unambiguous
waiver-of-reliance provision in that settlement agreement precluded Mr.
McAllen's "after-the-fact story" of fraudulent inducement as a matter of law.
The Supreme Court agreed and recognized, as Mr. Harrison had argued, that
"sophisticated parties represented by counsel in an arm's-length transaction
negotiated a settlement agreement that included clear and broad
waiver-of-reliance and release-of-claims language." The Court concluded that
the "unequivocal disclaimer of reliance in the parties' bargained-for
settlement agreement conclusively negates as a matter of law the element of
reliance needed to support McAllen's fraudulent-inducement claim." The
underlying dispute involves allegations of environmental contamination and
intentional battery with allegedly radioactive oil well tubing. Susman Godfrey
attorneys Johnny Carter and Rick Hess also worked on the Supreme Court briefs
and on all other aspects of the case.
In the second case, In re Poly-America, L.P. the Texas Supreme Court
granted conditionally a petition for mandamus to Susman Godfrey's client,
Poly-America, LP. The Texas Supreme Court held that Poly-America's
arbitration agreement was enforceable and that the trial court had not abused
its discretion when it granted the company's motion to compel arbitration.
Susman Godfrey partner Erica Harris represented Poly-America, LP.
In the third case, Zurich American Insurance Co., et al v. Nokia,
Incorporated No. 06-1030, the Texas Supreme Court held that Zurich American
Insurance Company, Federal Insurance Company and National Union Fire Insurance
Company had a duty to defend Susman Godfrey's client, Nokia, Inc, in a series
of class actions pending around the U.S. The ruling is a vindication for
Nokia which has spent millions successfully defending these claims. Nokia
hired Susman Godfrey partner Eric Mayer after losing on this issue in the
trial court. Mayer and Susman Godfrey lawyers Brian Melton, Ian Crosby and
Lexie White argued that Nokia's insurers wrongfully denied coverage. The
ruling by the Texas Supreme Court now opens the way for Nokia to recover
millions in defense costs and fees from this group of insurers. Mayer argued
the appeal for Nokia.
Susman Godfrey L.L.P., a law firm with more than 80 trial lawyers, was
recently named one of the top litigation boutiques in the country by The
American Lawyer. The firm represents plaintiffs and defendants in a broad
range of commercial litigation matters, including antitrust, patent and
intellectual property, securities and corporate governance litigation, energy,
commercial and products liability litigation, bankruptcy and financial
restructuring, accounting malpractice, arbitration, climate change litigation,
and foreign and international litigation matters. The firm has offices in
Houston, Dallas, Los Angeles, Seattle, and New York. For additional
information, visit http://www.susmangodfrey.com.
.gif)
