Anthony Kaim focuses his practice on commercial litigation in energy, oil and gas, fiduciary, construction, and employment disputes.
Anthony takes great satisfaction in his achievements on behalf of his clients who entrust him with their high-stakes disputes. Anthony’s recent trial successes include a unanimous defense verdict on behalf of a commercial real estate broker; an eight-figure jury verdict on behalf of an oil-and-gas executive; a total defense victory for the same executive in Delaware Chancery Court against claims of breach of fiduciary duty; and an eight-figure arbitration award for an oil-and-gas operator on a warranty claim.
Short of trial, Anthony recently obtained a multi-million-dollar settlement for an oil-and-gas operator for near full damages just days before trial and, in another matter, defeated class certification defending a major energy client.
Anthony began his career at Gibbs & Bruns following a clerkship with Judge Patrick E. Higginbotham on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. His work has been recognized in Legal 500 and Best Lawyers in the areas of energy and general commercial litigation.
Simmons v. NewQuest Properties
Represented NewQuest Properties against fiduciary-duty claims arising from a commercial real estate transaction in Greater Houston. In January 2023, following a two-week jury trial in which the plaintiffs sought more than $10 million in disgorgement and more than $70 million in punitive damages, the jury returned a take-nothing defense verdict.
Jonah Energy LLC v. CTAP, LLC
Hired as replacement counsel two months before a week-long arbitration hearing, we succeeded in proving that the defendant’s defective casing destroyed our client’s well. The Panel awarded our client over $11 million. We are currently seeking confirmation of the award in Colorado state court.
Tanos Exploration II, LLC v. PetroTech Solutions, LLC, et al.
Represented the well-operator against its chemical supplier in a case over $15 million of damage to dozens of wells, including one that failed catastrophically on Christmas Day. On the eve of trial, we settled on extremely favorable terms for our client.
David M. Dunwoody, Jr. v. EnVen Energy Corp. et al., in the District Court of Harris County
Represented David Dunwoody, co-founder and former president of EnVen, after the company squeezed him out and refused to pay his Severance benefits. After a three-week trial in Harris County, the jury found that Mr. Dunwoody had multiple, independent grounds for contractual Good Reason entitling him to Severance. The court awarded our client over $12 million.
EnVen Energy Corp. v. Dunwoody, in the Delaware Court of Chancery
Represented David Dunwoody, former co-founder and President of EnVen, in a case brought in Delaware Chancery Court by his former company alleging that Dunwoody breached his fiduciary duties. After a week-long trial in July 2023, the Chancellor announced her impressions, all in favor of Mr. Dunwoody. After receiving the Chancellor’s remarks, EnVen dismissed its claims against Dunwoody with prejudice for zero dollars.
Box Elder Kids, LLC, et al. v. Anadarko E & P Onshore, LLC, et al.
Representing Anadarko in a suit originally filed as a putative class of thousands of parties to Surface Owner Agreements alleging that Anadarko improperly changed its payment methodology in 2010. After discovery and briefing, we successfully defeated class certification. We continue to represent Anadarko against the individual claims of the plaintiffs.
Mike Boulter, et al. v. Noble Energy, Inc. and Kerr McGee Oil & Gas Onshore, LP
Representing oil and gas operator on hundreds of leases in Colorado’s DJ Basin against a class action alleging underpayment of royalties.
Unocal Pipeline Company v. BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc. et al.
Represented Chevron Corporation affiliate in litigation in Houston district court against affiliates of BP p.l.c., ConocoPhillips Company, and Exxon Mobil Corporation relating to Chevron affiliate’s withdrawal from the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System. After prevailing on appeal at the Houston Court of Appeals and succeeding in having the petition for review denied at the Texas Supreme Court, the case settled favorably for our client.
Occidental Chemical Corporation v. 21st Century Fox America, Inc., et al.
Representing Occidental Chemical Corporation in a suit filed on June 30, 2018 in which Occidental is seeking contribution from more than 100 defendants for, among other costs, the $165 million Occidental has agreed to spend to design the dredge-and-cap remedy the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined is necessary to remediate pollution in the lower 8 miles of the Passaic River.
BTEC New Albany LLC v. NRG Texas Power LLC
Brought claims on behalf of BTEC New Albany LLC (“BNA”) against NRG Texas Power LLC (“NRG”) for breach of a $110 million power-plant purchase agreement. After our client had dismantled, transported to Texas, and rebuilt a gas-fired power plant, NRG refused to close. NRG counterclaimed. After we successfully maintained a trial setting within a year of filing suit, the case settled on favorable terms.
EF Non-Op, LLC v. BHP Billiton Petroleum Properties (N.A.), LP, et al.
Represented BHP Billiton, regarding its operation of approximately 70 wells at issue in the Eagle Ford Shale, in a dispute brought by a non-operator claiming breach of contract, gross negligence, conversion, and fraud, and seeking over $15 million in alleged damages. BHP Billiton counterclaimed to recover millions of dollars in unpaid expenses on the joint account and for the assignment of undeveloped acreage to BHP. The case settled favorably for our clients in January 2018.
FINRA Arbitration
Defended private equity firm in a multi-million-dollar fee dispute brought by a former placement agent. The case was arbitrated before a FINRA panel. After plaintiff rested its case, we moved for a directed verdict. The case settled favorably prior to the panel ruling on our directed verdict motion.
Plains Gas Solutions, LLC v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC, et al.
Represented Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, a subsidiary of Kinder Morgan, in a lawsuit filed by Plains against TGP and other defendants relating to a gas processing contract entered into by Plains and TGP and the subsequent divesture of certain offshore pipeline assets to a third company, Kinetica. Plains alleged that Kinetica operated those pipelines in violation of the gas processing contract and sought over $100 million in damages. Weeks before trial, the case settled on extremely favorable terms.
ERG Resources, LLC v. Nabors Global Holdings II, Limited, et al.
Represented ERG Resources, Inc. in litigation against Nabors Global Holdings II, Ltd. and Parex Resources, Inc. involving the acquisition of oil and gas properties in the Republic of Colombia. In early 2012, ERG agreed to purchase the stock of Ramshorn International from Nabors for $45 million, which would give ERG ownership of Ramshorn’s valuable Colombian oil and gas interests. Nabors subsequently sold the assets to Parex for $75 million. ERG filed suit against Nabors and Ramshorn seeking specific performance and, in the alternative, damages for breach of contract. ERG also asserted claims against Parex and its subsidiary for tortious interference with ERG’s contract. After a two-day special appearance hearing, the trial court denied Parex’s and Ramshorn’s special appearances, but granted the special appearance of the Parex subsidiary. The jurisdictional rulings were appealed to the Texas Supreme Court, which determined that personal jurisdiction existed over Ramshorn but not over Parex or its subsidiary. As a result, ERG was required to pursue parallel litigation against Parex in Alberta, Canada. In 2017, ERG’s claims against all parties were resolved prior to trial in a series of settlements totalling $35 million.
ASR 2620-2630 Fountainview, LP, et al. v. ASR 2620-2630 Fountainview GP, LLC, et al.
Defended director of a publicly-traded property management company against claims of breach of fiduciary duty and obtained a no cost dismissal of all claims against the director after filing a summary judgment motion on his behalf. All costs of defense were recovered for our client from the company’s directors and officers liability insurance, which involved coordinating filings in a related bankruptcy proceeding to successfully dispute that the insurance proceeds were property of the bankruptcy estate.
Harris County, Texas, et al. v. International Paper Company, et al.
Represented Waste Management, Inc. and Waste Management of Texas, Inc. in a case brought by Harris County, Texas alleging over 40 years of discharges into the San Jacinto River from a dump site containing paper mill waste that was abandoned in the late 1960’s. Harris County sought daily penalties of over $3 billion from Waste Management and McGinnes Industrial Maintenance Corporation (a/k/a “MIMC”), the company that performed the disposal operations in the 1960s, and which many years later became a wholly owned subsidiary of Waste Management of Texas, Inc. Shortly before trial, the court granted a summary judgment dismissal of all claims against Waste Management, Inc. After the close of the evidence at trial, the court granted a directed verdict holding that the waste site constituted one facility for statutory purposes, meaning that Harris County could not multiply the penalties by three. On the morning closing arguments were scheduled, Harris County agreed to settle with Waste Management of Texas and MIMC for $29.2 million.
Blue Sky Golden FPS, Ltd. v. Fulcrum Energy, LLC et al.
Represented Golden Agri-Resources Ltd. in Texas state court against counterclaims asserted in an underlying lawsuit involving one of our client’s subsidiaries. The counterclaims sought hundreds of millions of dollars in damages based primarily on allegations that Golden Agri-Resources breached an oral contract and/or an oral partnership as well as fiduciary duties relating to a proposed joint venture to develop biofuels. Discovery was concluded in the case, and it then settled on extremely favorable terms for our client as well as our client’s subsidiary.
Futch v. Baker Botts
Represented Baker Botts against a malpractice claim brought by a former client that alleged Baker Botts provided the U.S. government, pursuant to an investigation, information that resulted in the client later pleading guilty to criminal charges. The client alleged breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and equitable fee forfeiture claims against Baker Botts. We obtained summary judgment on all claims at the trial court by arguing that the former client was impermissibly fracturing his claims, that his claims were barred because a felon cannot sue his attorneys for damages stemming from his conviction, and that no forfeiture claim exists where a party did not pay its own fees. We continued to represent Baker Botts on appeal and the Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment on all claims.
Scott Martin, et al v. Martin Resource Management Corp., et al.
Represented Keeneland Capital Management, LLC (“KCM”) in a shareholder derivative and individual suit involving its investment in Martin Resources Management Corporation (“MRMC”), a closely-held energy corporation in the business of transportation, storage, terminalling and processing of energy resources. Claims included shareholder oppression, breach of fiduciary duty, wrongful entrenchment and dilution, abuse of control, gross mismanagement and fraud stemming from the Directors’ alleged improper issuance of well over $50 million of MRMC stock for the purpose of entrenching management and diluting certain minority shareholders. MRMC and the MRMC Employee Stock Ownership Trust asserted counterclaims for over $20 million in alleged damages against all plaintiffs and other third parties. After two years of intense litigation that involved several other related lawsuits, the case settled favorably for KCM for a confidential amount.
Gardner Denver, Inc. v. Houston Service Industries
Represented the defendant in a trade secrets case involving multistage centrifugal blowers utilized in wastewater systems and industrial applications. In the middle of discovery, the plaintiff non-suited its claims with prejudice.
Farouk Systems Inc. v. Costco Wholesale Corporation
Represented Farouk Systems, manufacturer of the popular CHI hair care products, in an action against Costco concerning the sale of counterfeit products. After a seven-day trial, the jury determined that Costco had sold a counterfeit CHI hair iron. The jury also awarded Farouk Systems the maximum statutory damages for non-willful trademark infringement under the Lanham Act. After the jury award, the court entered a permanent injunction prohibiting Costco from selling counterfeit CHI hair irons.
LCIA Arbitration
Represented a pre-eminent AmLaw 100 law firm in a significant contract dispute both before the London Court of International Arbitration and in collateral litigation in federal and state courts in Houston. See Waiguh Siag v. King & Spalding LLP, 2010 WL 2671580 (S.D. Tex. June 30, 2010).
University of Texas, J.D., with high honors, 2008
Chancellors
Order of the Coif
Chief Articles Editor, Texas Law Review
University of Texas, B.B.A., 2003, Finance
Listed in The Best Lawyers in America, 2020-2024
Commercial Litigation
Named in Lawdragon’s “500 Leading Energy Lawyers,” 2024
Named in Benchmark Litigation, 2022-2024
Named to the “Under 40 Hot List,” 2017-2019, 2021
Named in Legal 500 US
Recommended in General Commercial Disputes, 2018, 2020
Recommended in Energy Litigation, 2017
Named a “Texas Rising Star” by Thomson Reuters, 2014-2018
State Bar of Texas, 2008
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
United States District Court for the Western District of Texas
Houston Bar Association, Member
Houston Bar Foundation, Fellow
“Classifying the Right to Rental Payment Streams Stripped Off a Lease,” 86 Tex. L. Rev. 857 (2007)