The Reynolds & Reynolds Company v. Superior Integrated Solutions, Inc.
Represented a major provider of automotive dealership management systems in federal litigation involving claims of copyright infringement, complex antitrust issues, tortious interference with contracts and other issues. We successfully moved to dismiss the antitrust and other counterclaims alleged against its client and the case later settled amicably.
D. Bobbitt Noel, Jr. v. Devon Energy Production Co., LP, et al.
Co-lead trial counsel for Plaintiff Bobbitt Noel in a fraud and breach of fiduciary duty case involving buy-out of minority interests in Chief Holdings, LLC. Won a $196 million judgment after a five week jury trial and defeated all of Defendants’ counterclaims. Defendants appealed the case. Following oral arguments in the 14th Court of Appeals in November 2012, the parties reached a confidential, mutually acceptable settlement that fully resolved the matter. The American Lawyer named Grant “Litigator of the Week” for his role in the case.
United States of America ex rel. Ivey Woodard v. DaVita, Inc.
Achieved a favorable settlement on behalf of DaVita, Inc., one of the world's largest providers of dialysis services. DaVita was sued in a substantial and complicated qui tam law suit, in which a private individual pursued claims on behalf of the United States government. The claims involved allegedly improper over-administration and billing for a commonly used anti-anemia drug over a 15-plus year time period.
Peregrine Pipeline Company, L.P. v. ETC Texas Pipeline, Ltd.
Represented the Texas subsidiary of a large natural gas pipeline company in an arbitration dispute brought by the seller of a pipeline against our client. At the end of the final day of the arbitration hearing, the matter settled for a small fraction of the amount claimed on terms favorable to our client.
Dickson, et al. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al.
Representing Matrix Petroleum, Talisman Energy USA and Statoil USA in a complex title dispute regarding valuable oil and gas property in the Eagle Ford shale formation in South Texas. Matrix, and Talisman and Statoil (through Talisman and Statoil’s jointly owned subsidiary), are assignees of a 7000 plus acre parcel of land that is the subject of bitter multi-party title dispute. We obtained a final summary judgment resolving all claims in our clients’ favor. The case is currently on appeal.
William G. West v. Mark Western, et al.
Defended two former officers and directors of Houston-based Tekoil & Gas Corporation stemming from the company’s bankruptcy in 2008. The Debtor’s Estate has sued Mr. Western and Mr. Goodman for breach of fiduciary duty and other causes of action. The case was pending in bankruptcy court, but was successfully removed to federal district court where discovery was proceeding. The case was mediated to a very successful conclusion before former Texas Supreme Court Justice Deborah G. Hankinson.
Mosh Holding, L.P. v. Pioneer Natural Resources Co.
Represented Defendant Pioneer Natural Resources in a complex oil & gas case brought on behalf of a royalty trust. Plaintiffs were seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. The case was resolved on satisfactory terms shortly before trial.
Cuesta, et al. v. Ford Motor Co., et al.
Secured a multi-million dollar settlement in favor of the Plaintiffs in a class action matter against Ford Motor Company and Williams Controls alleging defective accelerator pedals were installed in hundreds of thousands of Ford Super Duty pick-up trucks and Ford Excursions. The firm represented the Class Representatives and a nationwide Class of over 500,000 individuals.
Nevada Power Company v. Nevada Cogeneration Associates #2
Represented Nevada Cogeneration Associates #2 , a joint venture co-owned by Chevron and Dynegy, in the defense of an arbitration filed by electric utility Nevada Power Company. NCA #2 developed a qualified facility to produce power for the Las Vegas area which Nevada Power Company purchased under a terms of a 30-year power purchase agreement. The arbitration involved a dispute over the proper interpretation of certain provisions of the agreement. At the time of arbitration, the Utility forecast that in 2023 it would be entitled to a rebate of approximately $320 million. The matter was arbitrated before a former federal judge who ruled in favor of the firm’s client by denying in its entirety the Utility’s rebate claim.
Taita Chemical Company, Ltd. v. Westlake Styrene Corporation
Represented Westlake Styrene Corporation in a breach of contract case filed by Taita in federal court in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Westlake’s defenses were limited to estoppel, waiver and ratification. Westlake also filed a breach of fiduciary duty counterclaim. Following a multi-week trial, the jury found in favor of Westlake on its defenses, rejected Taita’s claims in their entirety, and awarded Westlake in excess of $20 million on its fiduciary duty counterclaims.