law-public-policy-grounds

law-public-policy, void as against public policy | illegality defense |

PUBLIC POLICY AS REASON FOR INVALIDITY | ILLEGALITY AS BAR TO
ENFORCEMENT

Justice Seymore Expresses Public Policy Concerns over Enforcement of Arbitration
Agreement in Attorney-Client Disputes
Pham v. Letney (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] March 4, 2010)(Hedges) (arbitration agreement in legal services
contract between lawyer and client enforced by mandamus, interlocutory appeal of order denying motion to
compel arbitration dismissed, FAA applied, TAA would be preempted)
INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL DISMISSED: Opinion by Chief Justice Hedges
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Seymore and Justice Sullivan
14-08-01153-CV Steven Tuan Pham v. Shelly Letney
Appeal from 215th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: Levi James Benton
Dissenting Opinion by Justice Seymore in Pham v. Letney
(In consideration of the unique relationship between attorney and client, Justice Seymore write s dissent to
articulate his concern about mandatory arbitration provisions in attorney-client agreements)
MANDAMUS CASE SEPARATELY DOCKETED: In re Tuam Pham (pdf) (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] March 4,
2010)(Hedges)(arbitration mandamus granted in lawyer-client dispute)
MOTION OR WRIT GRANTED: Opinion by Chief Justice Adele Hedges
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Seymore and Sullivan
14-09-00387-CV In Re Steven Tuam Pham
Appeal from 215th District Court of Harris County
Dissenting Opinion by Justice Seymore In re Tuam Pham (pdf)

Labidi, MD v. Sydow, 287 S.W.3d 922 (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Jun. 25, 2009)(Guzman)
(consolidation of an interlocutory appeal and a petition for writ of mandamus, challenge to district court's order
compelling arbitration and staying proceedings in the trial court fails)(unconscionabiltiy argument rejected re
arbitration of attorney-client disputes)(public policy arguments overruled)
Labidi argues that the arbitration provision is invalid because it violates Texas public policy. But Texas public
policy favors arbitration. See Forest Oil Corp. v. McAllen, 268 S.W.3d 51, 56 (2008); FirstMerit Bank, 52 S.W.3d
at 753. And "as both the federal and state arbitration acts pointedly exclude immediate review of orders
compelling arbitration, any balancing [of the benefits and detriments of delaying proceedings] must tilt strongly
against mandamus review." (In re Gulf Exploration, LLC, 52 Tex. Sup.Ct. J. 612, 2009 WL 1028049, at *3 (Tex.
Apr. 17, 2009)). TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM.CODE ANN. § 171.002 [...] has no application here: a legal malpractice
claim is not a personal injury claim,[7] and section 171.002 does not apply to service contracts in excess of
$50,000. Here, the fees at issue are, and were expected to be, more than $100,000. Moreover, if the FAA
applies —i.e., if the attorney-client agreement touches on interstate commerce—then such state-specific
safeguards are preempted if they would affect the arbitration agreement's enforceability. See In re Nexion Health
at Humble, Inc., 173 S.W.3d 67, 69-70 (Tex. 2005) (per curiam).
DISMISSED: Opinion by Justice Eva Guzman
Panel members: Justices Guzman, Mirabal and Boyce
14-08-00527-CV Abdel Hakim Labidi, M.D. Ph.D. v. Michael D. Sydow, Et Al
Appeal from 61st District Court of Harris County
In re Labidi, M .D ., 287 S.W.3d 922 (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Jun. 25, 2009)(Guzman)
MOTION OR WRIT DENIED: Opinion by Justice Eva Guzman
Panel members: Justices Guzman, Mirabal and Boyce
14-08-00757-CV In Re Abdel Hakim Labidi, M.D., PH.D.
Appeal from 61st District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: Hon. John Donovan

Symetra National Lif Ins. Co. v Rapid Settlements, Ltd. (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Apr. 21, 2009)(Hedges)
(arbitration award vacated as violation of public policy, transfer of structured settlement payments)
REVERSED AND RENDERED: Opinion by Chief Justice Hedges
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Anderson and Seymore
14-07-00880-CV Symetra National Life Insurance Company and Symetra Life Insurance Company v. Rapid
Settlements, LTD
Appeal from County Civil Court at Law No 1 of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: R. Jack Cagle

Authorlee v. Tuboscope Vetco International, Inc. (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Aug. 28, 2008)(Nuchia)
(challenge to agreed judgment, fraud claim, aggregate settlement claim, public policy)
AFFIRM TC JUDGMENT: Opinion by Justice Nuchia
Before Justices Nuchia, Keyes and Higley
01-06-00719-CV Anthony Authorlee, Dexter Burnett, Robert Derousselle, John Henry Young, Jerome
Stubblefield and Floyd Moran v. Tuboscope Vetco International, Inc.; AMF Incorporated; and Minstar, Inc.--
Appeal from 295th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Tracy Christopher
Dissenting Opinion by Justice Keyes (would set aside settlement aside as against public policy)

Cruse v. O'Quinn (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Nov. 25, 2008)(Brown)
(attorney fee sharing agreement void as against public policy, illegal contract, attorney disbarred
forfeiture of corporate privileges)
AFFIRMED: Opinion by Justice Brown
(Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Guzman and Brown)
14-08-00103-CV        Leonard A. Cruse and Cruse and Associates, P.C. v. John M. O'Quinn and John M.
O'Quinn & Associates, L.L.P.--Appeal from 212th District Court of Galveston County
Trial Court Judge: Susan Elizabeth Criss

The sole basis the firm alleges to support jurisdiction is the Agreement that formed the attorney-client
relationship. But the Agreement was voided by Cobb. Because the primary purpose of the Agreement --a
contingent fee agreement for legal services--was voided pursuant to the Government Code, and activity
stemming from the void Agreement was the only contact with Texas, there is no evidence to establish specific
jurisdiction. See CSR, Ltd., 925 S.W.2d at 594 (stating first requirement of personal jurisdiction is that defendant
have "contacts" with state) (citing Burger King, 471 U.S. at 475, 105 S. Ct. at 2183). Moreover, it would violate
the public policy of Texas for a court to allow enforcement of an agreement obtained in violation of the
disciplinary rules for attorneys. See In re AIU Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 109, 115 (Tex. 2004) (stating forum selection
clause obtained by fraud or overreaching or "contraven[ing] a strong public policy" of selected forum not
enforceable).
Cobbs v. Stern, Miller & Higdon (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Jul. 2, 2009)(Alcala)
(denial of special appearance reversed in interlocutory appeal, attorney-client disputes and litigation,
void or voidable contract, solicitation of clients contingency fee agreement as against public policy, affidavit
testimony by interested witness, interlocutory appeal-special appearance)
REVERSE TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT AND RENDER JUDGMENT: Opinion by Justice Alcala
Before Justices Jennings, Alcala and Higley
01-09-00112-CV John L. Cobbs v. Stern, Miller & Higdon
Appeal from 151st District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Michael Engelhart

TEXAS CAUSES OF ACTION ELEMENTS | HOUSTON CASE LAW | HO USTON COURTS OF APPEALS |
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS
HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE