Texas Lawyer, April 30, 2012 - American Business Media

April 30, 2012 • vol. 28 • No. 5 • $9.00w w w . t e x a s l a w y e r . c o madvertisementLaw Tech Texas05.10.128 a.m. to 5 p.m.Houstonwww.TexasLawyerEvents.comJury Awards $13 Million in Defamation Suit Filed By Attorney, Wifeby JOHN COUNCILjcouncil@alm.comOn April 20, a Tarrant County jury returned a $13.7million plaintiffs’ verdict in an unusual suit filed by an attorneyand his wife, finding defendants Jerry Coyel, ShannonCoyel and Charlie Doescher liable for defamation.The allegations in the plaintiffs’ fifth amended petitionin Lesher, et al. v. Doescher, et al., filed April 5, are as follows:In 2008, Mark Lesher, an attorney who had a practicein Clarksville, and his wife Rhonda, who owned a beautysalon in that town, were wrongfully accused of sexuallyassaulting Shannon Coyel, the wife of a former client ofMark Lesher’s.Months before they were indicted by a Red RiverCounty jury for alleged sexual assault, anonymous personsbegan posting defamatory comments about the Lesherson Topix.com, an online news bulletin board, the plaintiffsalleged. Thousands more comments about the couple wereposted after they were indicted.After a change of venue to Collin County, a jury foundthe Leshers not guilty on Jan. 16, 2009.The next month, the Leshers filed a defamation suit inTarrant County against 178 Jane and John Does, allegingthe anonymous posts on Topix.com harmed their reputationsin the community as businesspersons; damagedsee Jury, page 15special reportAnnual Report on Firm Finance –Texas’ Top 25 Firms ranked ByGross revenue, Net income,profits per partner andrevenue per lawyerThe Millionaires’ Club –Which Firms’ profits per partnerTopped $1 Million in 2011?The Profitability Index –Are Equity partners reallyMaking More Money?Size Matters –Which Firms Have theMost lawyers in Texas?See Pages 16-25Bluebonnets Big BucksBoots, andJackson Walker Capitalizes on Its Texas RootsPage 24plusThe Texas 100, a pullout posterlisting the lone Star State’slargest legal ShopsJackson Walker managing partner C. Wade Cooper helpedhis firm’s gross revenue jump 8.5 percent in 2011.angela morris>>>> INSIDE>> >> >> >>Texas gets two newfederal judges3Make equitya reality30How to write apersuasive résumé31advertisementIn-House Counsel SummitHOUSTON • MAY 17Visit www.TexasLawyerEvents.com or e-mail aburciaga@texaslawyer.com to register.

2 TEXAS lAWYErApril 30, 2012Connect with your peers byattending ’sIn-House Counsel SummitFIRM FINANCEThursday, May 17Vic and Anthony’s1510 Texas Ave.Houston, TX 770028:00 a.m. – 8:30 a.m. Networking Breakfast and Check-In8:30 a.m. – 9:15 a.m. Cloud Computing and Legal Technology9:15 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. Energy10:00 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. Mid-Morning Break10:15 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. Witness Credibility in Trial and Depositions“The In-House Counsel Summit provided outstanding practicaland networking opportunities. The presentations were topical,relevant and delivered by top-notch practitioners.”— General Counsel at Global Corporate Alliance, Inc.“Keeping up is impossible to do on your own. These programsallow you to be on top of your game.”— Senior Counsel at Jacobs Engineering Group11:00 a.m. – 11:45 a.m. Technology Assisted Review11:45 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. Networking Lunch12:30 p.m. – 1:15 p.m. The New America Invents Act andYour Intellectual PropertyThere is no fee to attend, but Summits are only open to in-house counsel.Applying for 3.75 hours of CLE credit.For sponsorship information, call 800.456.5484, ext. 7715. To register, visitwww.TexasLawyerEvents.com or call 800.456.5484, ext. 7764.Sponsored By“This was an excellent program and a very worthwhileinvestment of my time. Each speaker was brief and to thepoint.”DALLAS | HOUSTON— In-House Counsel at Advantage Human Resourcing“I realized the importance of early case analysis before theevent, but [this event] showed me a much better way to do it.”— General Counsel at Hartman Income REIT, Inc.

ApRiL 30, 2012TEXAS LAWYER 3inadmissibleNew Federal JudgesOn April 26, the U.S. Senate confirmed nomineesGregg Costa, who will become a judgein the Southern District of Texas’ GalvestonDivision, and David Guaderrama, who willtake his bench in the Western District of Texasin El Paso. U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas,who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee,praises the confirmations. “I’m thrilled Mr.Costa and Mr. Guaderrama, both of whom haveimpeccable credentials and a passionate commitmentto upholding the law, were confirmedtoday,” Cornyn says in a statement. U.S. Rep.Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, chairman of theTexas Democratic Congressional Delegation,also is pleased with the confirmations andwishes more nominees like them would beconfirmed by the Senate. “While this processtook far too long and there remain too manyunfilled judicial vacancies in Texas, this voterepresents modest progress,” Doggett says ina statement. Texas now has four vacant U.S.District Court benches. Guaderrama, a U.S.magistrate judge in the Western District, sayshe’s honored to become a U.S. district judge.“I look forward to taking the Oath of Office andcontinuing to serve the community of El Pasoand the Western District of Texas,” he says ina statement. Costa, an assistant U.S. attorneyin the Southern District, says, “I’m humbledby this tremendous honor and I’m excited bygetting started.” He says he plans to be swornin next week. Costa’s appointment will impactthe government’s criminal prosecution of formerexecutives with the Stanford FinancialGroup of Houston. Costa was the lead prosecutorduring R. Allen Stanford’s criminal trialin U.S. District Judge David Hittner’s courtin Houston. In March, a jury found Stanfordguilty of 13 of 14 criminal counts against him.The trial of Stanford’s co-defendants is set tobegin later this year. Costa says Assistant U.S.Attorney Jason Varnado will take his place onthe trial team.Suit Against NFLThirty-one former professional football playerssued the NationalFootball League in theU.S. District Court forthe Southern District ofTexas in Houston, allegingthe NFL failed towarn them about thedangers of head injuriesthey suffered duringtheir playing days. TheMatthew Mathenyplaintiffs in April 25’s Lee Roy Jordan, et al.v. National Football League include some ofthe most famous men ever to wear a DallasCORRECTION“Discipline,” Texas Lawyer, April 23, 2012,page 8, contained an error. The case namein Evidentiary Panel 4E case H0061030994is Commission for Lawyer Discipline v.John S. Chase Jr. The respondent is JohnS. Chase Jr. of Harris County, Bar No.04149100.Cowboys star on their helmets. Randy White,Rayfield Wright, Walt Garrison, Charles Waters,Preston Pearson, Bob Lilly and Jordan all areformer Cowboys who became famous playingfor the team in the 1970s and now are inthe Cowboys’ Ring of Honor or the NFL Hallof Fame. Matthew Matheny of Beaumont’sProvost Umphrey represents the plaintiffs.“Obviously a lot of law firms wanted them to beclients . . . and I’m sure they had spoken withmany law firms,” Matheny says. But all 31 hiredProvost, retaining Matheny and firm founderWalter Umphrey to represent them. The firmbelieves the case is “a worthwhile causefor an outstanding group of men,” Mathenysays. Brian McCarthy, NFL vice president ofcommunications, says the league denies theallegations in the suit. “The NFL has long madeplayer safety a priority and continues to do so.Any allegation that the NFL intentionally soughtto mislead players has no merit. It standsin contrast to the league’s actions to betterprotect players and advance the science andmedical understanding of the management andtreatment of concussions,” McCarthy writeseWe are your-discovery document review solution.Our TeamSTANDING (L TO R):Kristen Lyons J.D., Kay Walgren, Tracie Ephross, Kim Cartwright, Vera Terry, Maria Parigi J.D., Mike Snyder, Virginia Holbrook,Cortland Grynwald J.D., Amy Nelson J.D.SEATED (L TO R):Stacy Humphries J.D., Ruth-Ann Sivers, Linda Katz, Susan Pye J.D., Laura Eastman J.D., Phai George, Carrie Flick J.DPartnering with Pye Legal Group allows you to effectively manage the cost,risk and personnel associated with document review. In addition toproviding great attorneys to review documents at your location, we offerand oversee an on-site Document Review CenterLet our team be the solution to your legal hiring needs.WWW.PYELEGALGROUP.COMHOUSTON 713.255.1900 | DALLAS/FORT WORTH 214.367.5200continued on page 4TEXAS LAWYER, (ISSN) 0267-8306, is published weekly by ALM Media, LLC, 1412 Main Street, 13th Floor, Dallas, TX 75202. Subscription rates: Basic Rate is $381 – one year – for lawyers in firms of 2 or more andcorporations. Discounts available for solos, judges, government attorneys, non-profit organizations and all others. Bulk subscription rates are also available. Information: 214-744-9300. Periodical postage paid at Dallas, TX.POSTMASTER: Send address changes to TEXAS LAWYER, 1412 Main Street, 13th Floor, Dallas, TX 75202. Reproduction of this publication in whole or in part is prohibited without express written permission of the publisher.©2012. ALM Media Properties, LLC. All rights reserved.

4 TEXAS LAWYERApRiL 30, 2012continued from page 3in an email. Numerous former NFL playershave sued the league this year, also allegingthey were not warned about how head injuriescould affect them long term. In January, theU.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigationselected a U.S. District Court in Philadelphia tohandle all of the former NFL players’ litigation.Matheny, 34, was too young to remember mostof his clients’ playing days. But his father, alongtime Cowboys fan, filled him in. “Believeme, these were household names when I wasgrowing up,” Matheny says.On Board at the OCAOn May 7, Lubbock County court administratorDavid Slaytonwill become the newadministrative directorof the Texas Office ofCourt Administration.Former director CarlReynolds retired March31. “I’m real excitedabout the opportunity togo and work with theDavid SlaytonSupreme Court and the chief justice and allthe great employees at OCA,” Slayton says.As OCA director, he will supervise technicaland administrative services for courts acrossTexas, supervise more than 200 employeesand oversee a $45 million annual budget. Highcourt spokesman Osler McCarthy says, “DavidSlayton is and has been for several years areal wonder child in court administration up inLubbock. . . . He’s really shown himself to bea remarkable administrator.” When he startsas director, Slayton says he hopes to lead theOCA to reach out and help counties withoutAngelA Morrisprofessional court administrators, continue toexpand electronic filing across the state, andtest “innovative ideas” such as regional publicdefender offices and new court-performancemeasurement tools. In his position as directorof court administration in Lubbock County,Slayton says he supervised administration ofthe county’s district and county courts-at-law.Previously, he was court services supervisor forthe U.S. District Court for the Northern Districtof Texas in Dallas. Slayton holds a bachelor’sdegree in political science from Texas TechUniversity and a master’s in public administrationfrom Troy State University, which is nowcalled Troy University.Race for ChairFrank E. Stevenson, a Dallas partner in LockeLord, will take the gavel as chairman of theState Bar of Texas board of directors on June14 during the Bar’s annual meeting in Houston.Stevenson defeated Jo Ann Merica, specialcounsel at Sedgwick in Austin, in the racefor chairperson at the April 13 State Bar boardmeeting in Fort Worth. “I think Frank is going todo a wonderful job, and I look forward to servingthe lawyers of Texas in a different capacity,”Merica says. Asked about his decision to run,Stevenson says, “I had been encouraged byseveral members of the Bar board to considerdoing this.” State Bar president Robert Black,managing shareholder of MehaffyWeber inBeaumont, says Stevenson will be involved ina major effort to inform the lawyers of Texasof the many benefits available to them throughthe Bar. “We want to make sure everyone onthe board is getting out there and talking aboutall the benefits that are available” to lawyers,Black says. He says Bar members can realize“an amazing amount of savings” on manygoods and services, including rental cars andvehicle insurance. Stevenson has served on theState Bar board since 2010 and on the DallasBar Association board since 1999, servingas the DBA president in 2008. He has servedon the Dallas Bar Foundation’s board since2007. After graduating from the University ofVirginia School of Law in 1980, Stevensonjoined Locke Lord’s predecessor, Locke PurnellBoren Laney & Neeley in Dallas. His practicefocuses on administrative, transportation, realestate and finance law.Houston OutpostPaul Hastings opened an office in Houston onApril 23 staffed by fourpartners, including threewho formerly practicedat large Houston-basedfirms. The partners areGreg Nelson, a taxlawyer who came fromBaker Botts; ParisTheofanidis, a financelawyer from Vinson& Elkins; and StevenTredennick, a privateequity and mergersand-acquisitionslawyerwho was at Bracewell &Giuliani. Kevin Fisher, afinance and restructuringpartner, moved to theHouston office from PaulHastings’ San FranciscoGreg NelsonParis Theofanidisoffice. Greg Nitzkowski, managing partner ofPaul Hastings, says his firm has eyed Houstonfor the past three years because it’s a majorenergy industry market, but started work a yearago on opening an office. He expects the officeto grow to 25 to 30 lawyers within the first year.The firm has a numberof energy clients, includingCalpine Corp. ofHouston, he says. Fishersays Paul Hastings’ moveinto Houston is part ofthe firm’s global energyinitiative. Tredennicksays it’s “less about aHouston office and moreof a global energy practice.”Nelson, who willchair the office, saysone of the reasons hemade the move to PaulHastings is because ofits commitment to growingits energy practice,and its offices in majorfinance centers suchas New York City. TheStevenTredennickKevin FisherHouston office is the 19th office for the NewYork-based Paul Hastings, which also recentlysubmitted applications to open an office in SouthKorea. The Houston office opened its doorstoday, but Fisher has been in Houston for aboutfour months laying groundwork for the newoffice. Nelson joined on April 9, Theofanidis onApril 2, and Tredennick on Jan. 23. “Paris wasa good colleague and we wish him well,” ScottWulfe, V&E’s managing partner, says in a statementprovided by the firm. Maria Boyce, partnerin charge of the Houston office of Baker Botts,writes in a statement: “Houston is a great placefor the practice of law. We wish Paul Hastingsand Greg Nelson the best of luck.” In a statement,Bracewell managing partner Mark Evanswrites, “Steve is a talented attorney and a greatfriend, we wish him all the best in his new role.”West LegalEdcenterLEARN WHERE,WHEN, ANDHOW YOU WANT.West LegalEdcenter provides:Everything you need to complete your 15 CLE creditsHard-to-find ethics creditsMore than 500 Texas-accredited programsTo receive a complimentary program and learn moreabout taking advantage of West LegalEdcenter*Callus at:1.800.258.8538Visit us online:WestLegalEdcenter.com/link/learnmore

ApRiL 30, 2012Lawyer Files EEOC Complaint AllegingSexually Hostile Work Environmentby MIRIAM ROZENmrozen@alm.comLast month, appellate lawyer RuthPiller filed a complaint with the EqualEmployment Opportunity Commissionagainst her former employer, Houston’sHays, McConn, Rice & Pickering, whereshe worked for nine years.In the EEOC complaint, Piller allegesthe firm discriminated against her on thebasis of her gender and her neurologicaldisorder-related disability; subjected herto a “sexually hostile work environment”;and retaliated against her. Specifically,Piller alleges the firm terminated her inOctober 2011 and failed to accommodateher disability; members of the firm’s management,led by shareholder Staton M.Childers, harassed her with emails thatincluded Photoshopped images of Piller’sface on a naked body covered with sushiand on a body in a men’s room holding atape measure as an unidentified man usesa urinal.“[A] review ofnumerous emailsfound on Ms.Piller’s computerclearly indicatethat she was anactive participantin and, at times,even initiated theconduct aboutwhich she nowcomplains,”Michael C. Hayswrites.disability because it said her disability wasmaking her less productive, she writes inher EEOC complaint. Piller expected toreturn to work “without cognitive impairment,”but firm management terminatedher after she had been on disability for 90days, Piller alleges.Childers did not return a telephone callseeking comment.Through its lawyer Kerry Notestine,a shareholder in Houston’s Littler, Hays,McConn issued a statement from shareholderMichael C. Hays, who denies theallegations and writes:[A] review of numerous emailsfound on Ms. Piller’s computerclearly indicate that she was anactive participant in and, at times,even initiated the conduct aboutwhich she now complains. Hays,McConn has a strict and clearlyarticulated policy prohibitingharassment based on gender andother protected classifications.Had Ms. Piller taken offenseat any of the email conversationsin which she participated,we very much wish she wouldhave made a complaint so thatwe could have investigated andaddressed the issue immediately.Unfortunately we received nosuch complaints from her duringher employment or from any ofthe other participants and onlybecame aware of this behaviorupon receiving the complaintshe filed after leaving the firm.Let me be clear – the behaviorexhibited by Ms. Piller and theother participants in these emailconversations was unprofessionaland unacceptable, however anoutside investigator we engagedto look into the matter concludedthat it did not violate our harassmentpolicy. Nonetheless, weare now taking corrective actionto make sure activity of this sortdoes not happen again.TEXAS LAWYER 5“Hays McConn, through its male managementcommittee, instituted, nurtured,and encouraged a culture among its maleattorneys of exposing female partners andassociates alike to a systematic, long-term,sexually hostile, gender degrading culturedesigned to remind and enforce theidea among its female lawyers that Hays,McConn is a men’s club and the womenare second-class citizens,” Piller writes inher EEOC complaint.“Because I am a single mother with adeveloping and debilitating illness, I wasan easy mark for the management committeepartners’ unlawful and inexcusableconduct,” she writes.Piller alleges that in 2011 the medicationsshe took for trigeminal neuralgiadid not alleviate the symptoms. In July2011, her billable hours were low and firmmanagement asked her to go on long-termIn an interview, Piller says she didn’t complainto firm management earlier because “Ineeded my job and I liked my job.”Kathleen O’Connor and Bruse Loydof Houston’s Jones, Gillaspia & Loyd, whorepresent Piller, say their client will file astate court suit after they receive a releaseto do so from the EEOC, which they expectwithin the next two months.James Ryan, a spokesman for the EEOCin Washington, D.C., says federal law forbidshim from commenting.TEXASLAWYER.COMWEB EXTRARuth Piller’s EEOCcomplaint is online atwww.texaslawyer.com.Look for the linkwithin the online versionof this article.

ApRiL 30, 2012Latham & Watkins to RepresentUT in Racial Preference CaseTEXAS LAWYER 7by MATTHEW HUISMANmhuisman@alm.comIn a letter to Texas AG Greg Abbott (left),UT President William Powers Jr. asked forauthorization to hire outside counsel forthe high court briefing and argument who“will have significant higher educationexperience and Supreme Court practice.”The University of Texas at Austin willshell out close to $1 million for a team ofWashington, D.C., lawyers to defend itsadmission standards that use race as afactor in a case before the U.S. SupremeCourt.Latham & Watkins partners GregoryGarre and J. Scott Ballenger and of counselMaureen Mahoney have been hired to representthe university for $987,000, accordingto an outside counsel contract. The feeincludes a flat rate of $977,000 plus up to$10,000 for additional expenses. The case,which was granted certiorari by the U.S.Supreme Court in February, is expectedto be argued during the next term. TheAustin American-Statesman broke theinitial story about the contract.In selecting the Latham team, theuniversity may have used history as aguide. In 2003, Mahoney successfullyargued before the Supreme Court thatthe University of Michigan Law Schoolcould use race as a factor in its admissionsprocess to promote diversity. The case,Grutter v. Bollinger, was decided by a narrow,5-4 majority. Ballenger was the mainauthor of the winning brief.In the Texas case, Abigail Noel Fisherwas denied admission to the university in2008 and claimed she was discriminatedagainst because she was white. She allegedthat this violated her 14th Amendmentright to equal protection. The case doesnot challenge Texas’ top 10 percent law,which grants automatic admission to anypublic university in the state to studentswho graduate in the top 10 percent of theirhigh school class.Representing Fisher is Wiley Reinfounding partner Bert Rein. He declinescomment.In a March 29 letter to Texas AttorneyGeneral Greg Abbott, UT President WilliamPowers Jr. asked for authorization to hireoutside counsel for the Supreme Courtbriefing and argument who “will have significanthigher education experience andSupreme Court practice.”Powers, former dean of the UT Schoolof Law, commended the “excellent work”of former state solicitor general JamesHo and current Texas Solicitor GeneralJonathan Mitchell in their representationbefore the U.S. district court and the 5thU.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Ho has sinceleft for the Dallas office of Gibson, Dunn& Crutcher where he is a partner. Powerswrote that Mitchell “will continue to workwith the legal team on the potential mootnessissues as we move forward.”In an April 2 letter to Powers, FirstAssistant Attorney General Daniel Hodgewrote that the office had granted therequest for outside counsel and woulddefer representation.Ho declines to comment, and a Latham& Watkins spokeswoman says Mahoneyand Ballenger decline comment.Patti Ohlendorf, vice president forlegal affairs for the University of Texas,says in an interview that the universitymade its decision after extensive discussionwith the Texas Office of the AttorneyGeneral.“We felt that if we could get the perfectteam that had argued higher education casesand argued more frequently before theSupreme Court that it could bring anotherlevel to this case that we had not yet experienced,”Ohlendorf says. “The universitylooked at the team that was available andthought that this would be the best team tobring the case before the court.”Ohlendorf commends the work of thestate AG’s office and says the universitywas able to negotiate a discounted, flat-ratefee. As far as payment, Ohlendorf says theschool would not use state-appropriatedfunds or student paid fees. Instead, Powerswould have access to discretionary fundslike those collected from licensing of theuniversity trademark on various goodsand from ESPN’s Longhorn Network andgift funds.Former acting U.S. solicitor generaland Hogan Lovells partner Neal Katyalnotes that he doubts the university’s decisionto seek outside counsel was becausethe school was concerned about the qualityof the state’s lawyers.“Greg Garre is one of the very bestadvocates in the nation, and his firm hashistoric experience with this set of issues,”says Katyal in a statement. “I am absolutelysure the decision reflected nothing aboutthe Texas AG or SG (who are terrificlawyers).”Some legal analysts have suggested thatbecause Mahoney argued the Michigancase on behalf of the school’s affirmativeaction program, that she may have beenoverlooked as a possible Supreme Courtjustice nominee by President George W.Bush. Garre, who could be among thoseconsidered as a future Supreme Courtnominee under a Republican president,declines to comment on whether his acceptanceof the case could adversely affect hischances.Matthew Huisman is a staff reporter atThe National Law Journal. NLJ SupremeCourt Correspondent Tony Mauro andTexas Lawyer reporter Miriam Rozencontributed to this article.

8 FEBRUARY TEXAS 6, lAWYEr 20123TEXAS April LAWYER 30, 2012 7P R O F E S S I O N A L A N N O U N C E M E N T SWYNNE & WYNNE LLPIS PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THATKenneth R. Wynne and David E. Wynneably assisted by local counsel David Roberts of Port Lavacaobtained a unanimous jury verdict totaling$5,710,000For the wrongful plugging and abandonment of an orphaned offshore gas well.Gulf Energy Exploration Corp. v. Railroad Commission of Texas and Superior Energy Services L.L.C.For the past decade, Fee, Smith, Sharp and Vitullo, LLP has effectively represented and counseledits clients throughout Texas and beyond. We (January thank 24, the 2012) fellow members of the State Bar, and ourrepresentative clients, for their support and cooperation in the past and look forward to continuedsuccess in working with you in the future.After a 10 day trial in the Honorable 135th District Court of Calhoun County, TexasWWYNNE & WYNNE LLPDedicated to Excellence in Complex Litigation711 Louisiana St., Suite 2010Pennzoil Place, South TowerHouston, TX 77002877.FEE.SMITH FeeSmith.com(713) 227-8835www.wynne-law.comTHOMAS W. FEE BRETT A. SMITH MICHAEL P. SHARP ANTHONY L. VITULLODALLAS Three Galleria Tower 13155 Noel Road Suite 1000 Dallas, Texas 75240 P 972.934.9100 F 972.934.9200AUSTIN 816 Congress Avenue Suite 1265 Austin, Texas 78701 P 512.479.8400 F 512.479.8402NEW PARTNERS?Contact Forrest WilliamsNEW PARTNERS?Mark Burck, Mark Lapidus,George Jackson and Scot Chaseare pleased to announce thatCaldwell Fletcher*has joined the firm as a Shareholder214.744.7751 or fwilliams@alm.comH. Mark BurckContact Forrest WilliamsA. Scot ChaseDaniel R. Dutkofor more information regardingShea M. Henry214.744.7751 or fwilliams@alm.comPROFESSIONAL ANNOUNCEMENTSfor more information regardingand continues his practice in Insurance Defense and Bad Faith,Subrogation, Maritime Law and Transportation.George T. JacksonMegan KnudsenMark R. LapidusAttorneys at Law5177 Richmond Ave., Suite 850, Houston, TX 77056(713) 400-6000 f (713) 622-8054 www.bljc-law.comAnnounce Your Firm's Verdicts and Settlements Here!PROFESSIONAL ANNOUNCEMENTSContact Forrest Williams214.744.7751 or fwilliams@alm.com

FEBRUARY April 30, 20123 6, 20123TEXAS lAWYEr LAWYER 97P R O F E S S I O N A L A N N O U N C E M E N T SWYNNE & WYNNE LLPAnnounce Your Firm'sIS PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THATKenneth R. Wynne and David E. Wynneably assisted by local counsel David Roberts of Port LavacaName Changes, Verdictsobtained a unanimous jury verdict totaling$5,710,000For the wrongful plugging and abandonment of an orphaned offshoregas well.and SettlementsGulf Energy Exploration Corp. v. Railroad Commission of Texas and Superior Energy Services L.L.C.After a 10 day trial in the Honorable 135th District Court of Calhoun County, TexasW(January 24, 2012)hereWYNNE & WYNNE LLPDedicated to Excellence in Complex Litigation711 Louisiana St., Suite 2010Pennzoil Place, South TowerHouston, TX 77002(713) 227-8835www.wynne-law.comNEW PARTNERS?Contact Forrest Williams214.744.7751 or fwilliams@alm.comfor more information regardingMark Burck, Mark Lapidus,George Jackson and Scot Chaseare pleased to announce thatCaldwell Fletcher*has joined the firm as a Shareholderand continues his practice in Insurance Defense and Bad Faith,Subrogation, Maritime Law and Transportation.H. Mark BurckA. Scot ChaseDaniel R. DutkoShea M. HenryGeorge T. JacksonMegan KnudsenMark R. LapidusAttorneys at LawPROFESSIONAL ANNOUNCEMENTSContact Forrest Williams at5177 Richmond Ave., Suite 850, Houston, TX 77056(713) 400-6000 f (713) 622-8054 www.bljc-law.com214.744.7751 or fwilliams@alm.comAnnounce Your Firm's Verdicts and Settlements Here!Contact Forrest Williams214.744.7751 or fwilliams@alm.com

10 TEXAS lAWYErnewsmakersNew Positions. . . Shawn R.O’Brien has joinedMayer Brown’s tax controversypractice in theHouston office.. . . Kimberly M.Bonnen has rejoinedLocke Lord as of counselin the public law practicegroup in Houstonand Austin.. . . Emily S. Whitehas joined Munck WilsonMandala in Dallas as anassociate in the intellectualproperty section.. . . Managing shareholderOscar Treviñohas become a nameshareholder in Austin’sWalsh, Anderson,Gallegos, Green &Treviño. The firm formerlywas known asWalsh, Anderson, Brown,Gallegos & Green.BonnenWhiteTreviño. . . Worthy Walker has been named apartner in Elrod in Dallas.. . . David L. Fields has joined the DallasGittinG soffice of Haynes and Boone as a partner in thereal estate practice group.Appointments. . . Gov. Rick Perry has named ex-officiomembers to the governor’s Criminal JusticeAdvisory Council, including: James Bethke;Judge David L. Hodges; Shannon Edmonds;Judge Sharon Keller; Robert J. Lerma; stateRep. Tryon Lewis; James McLaughlin Jr.;and state Sen. John Whitmire.Awards. . . The TexasCenter for Legal Ethicshas announced thatformer Texas SupremeCourt Justice HarrietO’Neill, founder of theLaw Office of HarrietO’Neill in Austin, andKevin Dubose, a partnerat Alexander Dubose& Townsend in Houston,will receive the 2012Chief Justice Jack PopeProfessionalism Award.. . . The MinorityCorporate CounselAssociation has honoredWeil, Gotshal &Subscribers can read more Newsmakers online.Go to www.texaslawyer.com and click on “Newsmakers.”O’NeillDuboseManges with its Thomas L. Sager Award forthe Southwest RegionCertification. . . Sam Houston of The Ford Firm inSan Antonio has become board certified incivil appellate law by the Texas Board of LegalSpecialization.Election. . . Frank E.Stevenson, a partnerin the Dallas office ofLocke Lord, has beenelected chairman of theboard of directors ofthe State Bar of Texas.He will take office dur Stevensoning the State Bar ofTexas Annual Meeting to be held June 14-15in Houston and will serve as chairman untilJune 2013.To submit “Newsmakers,”email amcmillan@alm.com.April 30, 2012GoodNewsIs WorthRepeating!Your mentionin Texas Lawyer*is available for reprint.We offer turnkey servicesincluding design, rights,management andlow-cost printing.*Material published in Texas Lawyeris copyrighted and may not becopied without permission.For information and ordering,please call 877-257-3382 oremail reprints@alm.com.Join Texas Lawyer’s business department for our technology event, Law Tech Texas with sessions on:• E-Discovery Challenges and Solutions for 2012• Using Predictive Coding to Reduce Review Sets: A Primer on the Law and Technology• Ways to Manage E-Discovery Costs• Information Governance: Getting It Right the First (and Only)Time• Advantages of Enterprise Content Platforms – Store, Retrieve, Protect and Preserve Critical Data for Decades• Top 5 Ethical Concerns for Lawyers in E-DiscoveryKeynote Speaker: Craig Ball, certified computer forensic examiner, law professor and electronic evidence expertRenaissance Hotel, Houston • 6 Greenway Plaza East • Houston, TX 77046 • 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.Pending up to 5.25 hours of CLE credit. Only $25 to attend and includes breakfast, lunch and cocktails.Visit www.TexasLawyerEvents.com for information.Sponsored ByDALLAS | HOUSTON

April 30, 2012TEXAS lAWYEr 11verdictsearchSubscribers can read more verdicts and settlements online.Go to www.texaslawyer.com and click on “Verdicts & Settlements.”To submit a verdict or settlement, go to www.texaslawyer.com/TXverdicts.MOTOR VEHICLEJury awards $21,200 topassenger claiming injuriesOn March 20, a passenger who claimed cervicaland lumbar disk bulges in a collision wasawarded $21,200. In 2009, Myrian Duran was ina minivan that was struck by Eric Melhorn. Sheunderwent chiropractic treatment and physicaltherapy and was eventually diagnosed with diskbulges at C5-6, C6-7, L3-4 and L4-5. She claimedthat her injuries continue to cause her severe painwhen performing her duties as a housekeeper.Defense counsel argued that Duran was not injuredas severely as claimed.Duran v. Melhorn, No. B-185,375Court: 60th District Court, Jefferson CountyPlaintiff’s Attorney: Mark W. Frasher, BeaumontDefense Attorney: Catherine Cockrell, G. PatrickCollins & Associates, HoustonDriver claiming chronic neckinjury awarded $75,133On Feb. 14, a driver who claimed that hesuffers from chronic neck pain because of a rearenderwas awarded $75,133. In 2008, Carl Westwas stopped on an on-ramp when he was struckby Joseph Birmingham. West claimed chronic facetinflammation or irritation. He went to a pain managementdoctor, who performed epidural steroidinjections and, on June 25, 2009, a rhizotomy,which is a painful procedure. He consistently toldhis doctors that his head was turned to the left atthe time of impact and that he was experiencingpain on the right side of his neck, which is whereone would expect it. The defense argued that theinjuries were unrelated to the accident becausethere was a seven-month delay in treatment.West v. Birmingham, No. 80083.86Court: 86th District Court, Kaufman CountyPlaintiff’s Attorney: Mark D. Frenkel, Frenkel &Frenkel, DallasDefense Attorney: Jessica Stettler, Herald,Farish & Hughes, ArlingtonJury awards $25,266 for sprains,strains in rear-enderOn March 8, a jury awarded $25,266 to a manwho claimed neck and back sprains and strains ina rear-ender. In 2010, Peter Simic was going about35 mph when he was struck by Lindsey Solorzano.About five days later, he started chiropractic treatment,which lasted about two months. Simic filedan uninsured motorist claim with his own carrier,Allstate County Mutual Insurance Co. He said hisinjuries make it more difficult to do his job, to playwith his child and to help with household chores.Simic v. Allstate County Mutual Insurance Co.,No. 2011-003172Court: Tarrant County Court-at-Law No. 1Plaintiff’s Attorneys: Mark Anderson andRobert M. Kisselburgh, Anderson Law Firm,Fort WorthDefense Attorney: Young Christian Jenkins, G.Patrick Collins & Associates, DallasChild who fractured skullgets $14,500On Jan. 30, a driver who allegedly disregardeda stop sign and injured his 3-year-old passengeragreed to pay a $14,500 settlement. In 2008,Marianna Smith was in a minivan driven by heruncle, Russell Borchers. Smith sustained a skullfracture and a scalp laceration. She was airliftedfrom the scene and hospitalized in an intensive careunit for five days. Her scalp laceration required fivestitches to close.Smith v. Borchers, No. 97774-00-2Court: Potter County Court-at-Law No. 2Plaintiffs’ Attorneys: Robert P. Kalinke and MaryBradshaw Ross, Hunter, Kalinke & Boyd, DallasDefense Attorney: William A. Franklin, Boerner,Dennis & Franklin, LubbockJury sides with defense inthree-car crashOn Jan. 31, a jury declined to award damagesto a man who claimed that he sustained back andneck strains in a three-car collision. Jose Rico wasinvolved in a collision with a car driven by BenjaminJ. Rosenthal and a second car. Rico claimedRosenthal failed to keep a proper lookout or controlhis speed and collided with the rear of this car,pushing it forward and causing it to collide with hiscar again. Rosenthal denied negligence, claimingthe driver of the second car was the sole proximatecause of Rico’s alleged injuries. Rico claimedcervical, thoracic and lumbar strains. Defensecounsel argued that the second collision occurredat approximately 2 mph to 4 mph and was not theproximate cause of Rico’s injuries.Rico v. Rosenthal, No. 17-241899-09Court: 17th District Court, Tarrant CountyPlaintiff’s Attorney: Scott G. Robelen, Bailey &Galyen, DallasDefense Attorneys: Brian D. Garner and RobynM. Wise, Law Offices of Brian D. Garner, HurstDriver hit by Dallas employeeawarded $45,500On March 2, a jury awarded $45,500 to adriver who blamed a Dallas employee for hismultiple injuries in a crash. Bonifacio Fonsecaand Salvador Acosta were in a pickup truckin stop-and-go traffic on Interstate 75. Thecity worker rear-ended them and stipulated toliability. Acosta settled the week before trial fora little more than $19,000. Defense counseldisputed the proximate cause of Fonseca’sinjuries. He claimed neck, back, right knee, andright shoulder sprains and strains. The defenseargued minor impact and introduced photosof the plaintiffs’ vehicle. The jury found thatthe defendant’s negligence proximately causedFonseca’s injuries.Fonseca v. City of Dallas, No. CC-09-09713-CCourt: Dallas County Court-at-Law No. 3Plaintiff’s Attorney: Lucas Lafitte, Ben AbbottP.C., GarlandDefense Attorneys: Julie B. Essenburg andPatricia De La Garza, City Attorney’s Office,DallasThe verdicts and settlements above arereported and written by VerdictSearch,a Texas Lawyer affiliate.THE JAMS FOUNDATIONBrINgINg cONFlIcTrESOlUTION wHErEIT’S MOST NEEDED.The impossible seems to be happening. Former gang leaders areteaching non-violent dispute resolution in the streets. High schoolstudents who once looked the other way are now making it theirbusiness to deal with bullying. And every day, teachers trainedin ADR are turning unruly classrooms into productive learningenvironments. It’s due in large part to the JAMS Foundation, wherewe’ve donated more than $4 million to put ADR into more hands,to do more good. For details, go to www.jamsfoundation.org.800.352.5267 | www.jamsadr.com

12 TEXAS lAWYErcasesummariesApril 30, 2012Subscribers can read the full text of these opinions online. Go towww.texaslawyer.com and click on “Appellate Court Opinions.”Texas Supreme Court z Texas Court of Criminal Appeals z Texas Courts of Appeals z 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appealsby DAVID POPPLEEditor’s note: What follows are summariesof state and federal appellate courtopinions issued from April 13 to April 20.The list is organized by court and practicearea. All of the opinions listed are availableon www.texaslawyer.com.Texas Supreme CourtArbitrationBison Building Materials Ltd. v. AldridgeApril 20, 2012; No. 06-1084The issue in this case is whether anappellate court has jurisdiction over anappeal from a trial court order confirmingan arbitration award in part andvacating the award in part based onthe existence of unresolved questionsof law or fact necessary to a ruling, yetthe trial court did not expressly directa rehearing. Under circumstances inwhich the Texas Arbitration Act doesnot provide appellate jurisdiction, atrial court unreasonably delaying theproceedings by ordering re-arbitrationfor arbitrary or unsupported reasonsmay be the proper subject of a writof mandamus. There is no indicationin the present case, however, that theorder serves any purpose other thanto resolve legitimate factual and legalissues. The court of appeals’ judgmentis affirmed and dismissed for want ofjurisdiction.Business LawCruz v. Andrews Restoration Inc.April 20, 2012; No. 10-0995In this dispute that ensued after a stormdamaged a house between a restorationcompany, an insurer and a homeowner, ajury found in the restoration company’sfavor, and the trial court rendered judgmentagainst the homeowner and itsinsurer, jointly and severally. The courtCONTRARY TOPOPULAR BELIEFwww.Sbotit.comExclusively protecting members of the Barand their families for nearly 40 years.of appeals affirmed in part and reversedin part. Notice and restitution or a tenderof restitution are not prerequisitesto a remedy under Texas Business andCommerce Code §17.50(b)(3), as longas the affirmative relief to the consumercan be reduced by (or made subject to)the consumer’s reciprocal obligation ofrestitution. The court of appeals’ judgmentis reversed and remanded in partand affirmed in part.Civil PracticeThe Mansions in the Forest L.P. v.Montgomery CountyApril 20, 2012; No. 10-0969The court of appeals held that omissionof a jurat was a substantive defectunder both the Texas Government Codeand Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 166a,and that such a defect could be raised forthe first time on appeal. Neither the TexasGovernment Code nor Texas Rule of CivilProcedure 166a requires such an affidavitto contain a jurat. When the record lacksany indication that a purported affidavitwas sworn to by the affiant, however,the written statement is not an affidavitunder the Government Code, but such adefect is waived if not raised in the trialcourt. The court of appeals’ judgment isreversed and remanded.ContractsAshford Partners Ltd. v. Eco Resources Inc.April 20, 2012; No. 10-0615This appeal is from a judgment awardinga tenant damages for a landlord’sbreach of a construction-related dutyunder a build-to-suit lease agreement. Thecost of repair is the appropriate measureunder the circumstances of this case.Because under the appropriate measurethere is no evidence that the tenant hasbeen damaged, the court of appeals’ judgmentis reversed and rendered.LAWYERSAREN’T ALWAYSPREPAREDThe average cost of childbirth is $10,000.Be ready. Maternity coverage solutions that best fit your needs.Employment LawSafeshred Inc. v. MartinezApril 20, 2012; No. 10-0426In this alleged wrongful-termination case,the court of appeals’ correctly concluded thata Sabine Pilot cause of action sounds in tortand allows punitive damages upon properproof. However, because the plaintiff failed topresent legally sufficient evidence of malicerelating to his firing, the court of appeals’judgment is reversed insofar as it affirms theaward of exemplary damages.Legal ProfessionCommission for Lawyer Discipline v. SchaeferApril 20, 2012; No. 10-0609Following a unanimous finding of misconductby an evidentiary panel quorum,an attorney appealed the panel’s order ofdisbarment to the Board of DisciplinaryAppeals on the ground that the evidentiarypanel was not composed of the requiredratio of public to attorney members. BODAvacated the panel’s judgment and remanded.The panel-composition requirement is notjurisdictional and the evidentiary panel’sorder was voidable, not void. Because noobjection was lodged to the evidentiarypanel’s composition, BODA’s judgment isreversed.TortsSalinas v. SalinasApril 20, 2012; No. 11-0131Maria Salinas contends that the courtof appeals affirmed a judgment against herbased on an alleged defamatory statementthat the jury concluded had caused no harmto the plaintiff. Even if some mental anguishcan be presumed in cases of defamation perse, and even if the statement was defamatoryper se, the law does not presume any particularamount of damages beyond nominaldamages. The court of appeals’ judgment isreversed and remanded.Texas Court of Criminal AppealsCriminal LawEx Parte EnriquezApril 18, 2012; No. AP-76,774In this application for habeas corpus, trialcounsel filed an affidavit with the trial court,in which he stated that he advised applicantof some of the consequences of the drugfree zone allegation but was not aware of theparole consequences of the drug-free zoneallegation until after applicant’s probation hadbeen revoked. Habeas relief is granted.Ex Parte PereiraApril 18, 2012; No. AP-76,770The applicant for habeas corpus wasconvicted of two counts of possession of childpornography and sentenced to 10 years’imprisonment on each count. He was alsoconvicted of two counts of possession withthe intent to promote child pornographyand sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonmenton each count. Applicant contends that hispleas were rendered involuntary becausethe plea agreement cannot be followed. Thetrial court determined that applicant pleadedguilty pursuant to an agreement that thesesentences would run concurrently with afederal sentence. Habeas relief is granted.Lilly v. StateApril 18, 2012; No. PD-0658-11The appellant pleaded guilty to of assaulton a public servant. The court of appealsheld that the appellant failed to prove thathis trial was closed to the public. Proper findingswill identify the overriding interest andhow that interest would be prejudiced, whythe closure was no broader than necessaryto protect that interest, and why no reasonablealternatives to closing the proceedingexisted. Whether a particular defendant’strial was closed to the public should beascertained on a case-by-case basis afterconsidering the totality of the evidence. Thejudgments of the court of appeals and trialcourt are reversed and the case is remandedfor a new trial.Merritt v. StateApril 18, 2012; No. PD-0916-11A jury found the appellant guilty of arsonfor the burning of an insured and mortgagedvehicle. The court of appeals held that theevidence was insufficient. Although motiveand opportunity are not elements of arsonand are not sufficient to prove identity, theyare circumstances indicative of guilt. Thecourt of appeals’ judgment is reversed andremanded to the court of appeals.Pfeiffer v. StateApril 18, 2012; No. PD-1234-11After the trial judge denied his motion tosuppress methamphetamine found duringa traffic stop, appellant pleaded guilty to itspossession pursuant to a plea bargain. Thecourt of appeals reversed, finding that theofficer lacked reasonable suspicion to continueto detain appellant until a drug dog wasbrought to the scene. The state need not fileits own notice of appeal when it raises a crosspointconcerning a ruling on a question oflaw under Texas Code of Criminal ProcedureArticle 44.01(c). The court of appeals’ judgmentis reversed and remanded.Courts of Appeals — CivilAdministrative LawTexas Real Estate Commission v. JoyceFort Worth Court of AppealsApril 19, 2012; No. 02-11-00005-CVThe appellant, Texas Real EstateCommission, appeals an order directingit to pay $50,000 from the Real EstateRecovery Trust Account to the appellee,Joyce I. Bayless. Texas Occupations Code§1101.605(a) applies to an action against areal estate license holder upon which anuncollectible judgment is based. The trialcourt’s judgment is reversed and rendered.AppealsBrown Mechanical Services Inc. v.Mountbatten Surety Company Inc.Houston’s 1st Court of AppealsApril 19, 2012; No. 01-10-00776-CVThe appellant attempts to appeal fromthe trial court’s order dismissing its bill ofreview. The deadline for filing a notice of

April 30, 2012TEXAS lAWYEr 13appeal runs from the date of the trial court’sdismissal order, not the date the trial courtrules on a motion to reinstate. The appealis dismissed for want of jurisdiction.ArbitrationBosscorp Inc. v. Donegal Inc.Houston’s 14th Court of AppealsApril 17, 2012; No. 14-11-00439-CVThis is an appeal from a grant of amotion to stay arbitration. Under Delawarelaw, which applies to the agreements in thiscase, the court properly exercised its jurisdictionto decide the scope of arbitrabilityof the issues but erred in granting the stayof arbitration with regard to two appellees.The trial court’s order is affirmed in partand reversed in part, with instructions.Attorneys’ FeesAshton Grove LC v. Jackson Walker LLPDallas Court of AppealsApril 18, 2012; No. 05-09-01538-CVIn this dispute involving legal fees,the trial court granted a firm’s motionfor summary judgment for the recoveryof $433,561.29 in fees based on breach ofcontract. This case presents the uniquesituation of deciding whether a partymust prove its attorneys’ fees are reasonableunder the Andersen factors whenthere has been no showing of a breachof an underlying contract resulting inliability. Although the Andersen courtdid not discuss factors to be consideredin awarding attorneys’ fees based on anhourly contract, but instead ruled accordingto contingent-fee contracts, the factorsshould apply to these facts. The summaryjudgment is reversed and remanded inpart, and affirmed in part.Civil PracticeIn Re CompleteRx Ltd.Tyler Court of AppealsApril 18, 2012; No. 12-11-00391-CVThe relator challenges an order modifyingthe deadline for responding to an offerof settlement. Texas Rule of Civil Procedure167 authorizes the trial court to modify thetime limits for filing a declaration underRule 167.2. Nothing in the rule permits atrial court to modify that time limit as todefendant that has filed a declaration. Thewrit is conditionally granted.In Re MinnfeeAmarillo Court of AppealsApril 18, 2012; No. 07-12-0119-CVThe relator in this application for writof mandamus complains that the districtclerk has failed to file a document titled“Civil Case Information Sheet.” TexasGovernment Code §22.221 expressly limitsthe mandamus jurisdiction of the courtsof appeals to writs necessary to enforcethe jurisdiction of the court of appeals andwrits against specified district or countycourt judges in the court of appeals district.The application is denied for lack ofjurisdiction.Commercial LawAll American Siding & Windows Inc. v.Bank of AmericaTexarkana Court of AppealsApril 20, 2012; No. 06-11-00104-CVThe plaintiffs, victims of fraud, complainedthat their bank promised its serviceswere secure and that it made a hostof promises on its website to that effect.The trial court granted the bank’s motionsfor summary judgment. An allegation ofbreach of contract, without more, doesnot constitute a false, misleading or deceptiveact in violation of the DTPA. The trialcourt’s judgment is affirmed.Energy LawTara Partners Ltd. v. CenterPoint EnergyResources Corp.Houston’s 1st Court of AppealsApril 19, 2012; No. 01-11-00050-CVThe appellant sued CenterPointEnergy for breach of contract, allegingthat CenterPoint had billed the appellant formore natural gas than it actually used. Thetrial court granted CenterPoint’s plea to thejurisdiction. The appellant was required toexhaust all administrative remedies beforeseeking review of the agency’s action in thedistrict court. The trial court’s dismissal isaffirmed.Family LawIn Re: MarksFort Worth Court of AppealsApril 19, 2012; No. 02-12-00129-CVIn this habeas corpus proceeding, therelator contends he did not knowingly andintelligently waive his right to counsel.Based on the totality of the circumstances,the record supports that the relator knowinglyand intelligently waived his right tocounsel and elected to proceed with thecontempt hearing. The writ is denied.In the Interest of J.P. and F.P.Dallas Court of AppealsApril 16, 2012; No. 05-11-00679-CVThe appellant appeals from a final decreeof divorce and the subsequent denial of hismotion for new trial. Absence of counselalone is not good cause for a continuance.The trial court’s judgment is affirmed.S.H.R. v. Department of Family and ProtectiveServicesHouston’s 1st Court of AppealsApril 20, 2012; No. 01-10-00999-CVThe appellant’s parental rights to histhree minor children were terminatedafter a bench trial. Evidence was admittedwithout objection that the children testedpositive for oral and genital herpes. Theevidence is factually insufficient. The terminationorder is reversed and remanded.GovernmentLazarides v. FarrisHouston’s 14th Court of AppealsApril 17, 2012; No. 14-11-00404-CVIn this groundwater diversion case, theappellant appeals the trial court’s denialof a motion for summary judgment inwhich he asserted various challenges tothe trial court’s subject-matter jurisdiction.Administrative remedies available underLocal Government Code §211 generallymust be exhausted before a party may seekjudicial review of a determination made byan administrative official. When ultra viresclaims have been alleged, the claim is notagainst the governmental unit, and theirrevocable election in Texas Civil Practiceand Remedies Code §101.106(b) does notbar the suit against the state actor in his orher official capacity. The trial court’s judgmentis reversed and remanded in part andrendered in part.Health LawFung v. FischerAustin Court of AppealsApril 13, 2012; No. 03-10-00298-CVIn this health care liability case, thedefendant health care providers bringthis interlocutory appeal of the probatecourt’s orders concerning expert reports.A nonsuit and repleading does not restartan expired deadline for serving an expertreport addressing the health care liabilityclaim asserting the original defendant’sdirect liability, and a “supplemental” reportmay not provide essential information forthat health care liability claim that wasomitted from the previously served expertreports. The probate court’s orders arereversed and remanded in part and renderedin part.McKellar v. CervantesTexarkana Court of AppealsApril 18, 2012; No. 06-11-00120-CVIn this health care liability case, thedefendant health care providers appeal thetrial court’s order denying their motion todismiss the plaintiff’s health care claimsbased on claimed deficiencies in twoexpert reports. An expert report must providea fair summary of the expert’s opinionsas of the date of the report regardingapplicable standards of care, the mannerin which the care rendered by the physicianor health care provider failed to meetthe standards, and the causal relationshipbetween that failure and the injury, harmor damages claimed. The trial court’sjudgment is reversed and remanded inpart and affirmed in part.Insurance LawWarren E&P Inc. v. Gotham Insurance Co.El Paso Court of AppealsApril 18, 2012; No. 08-10-00198-CVThis is the third appeal in a disputerelating to the payment of insuranceproceeds following an oil well blow-out.The appellant appeals the trial court’sjudgment in favor of the insurer. Wherethe parties to an insurance contract havespelled out their respective remediesand the policy addresses reimbursement5950 Sherry Lane, Suite 540,issues, equity cannot give rights of recoverythat the parties did not agree to intheir contract. The trial court’s judgmentis reversed and rendered.Real PropertyArdmore Inc. v. Rex Group Inc.Houston’s 1st Court of AppealsApril 19; No. 01-11-00328-CVThis suit concerns a dispute overownership of certain commercial property.The trial court determined thatThe Rex Group had timely exercised itspurchase option under a lease and thatthe description of the property subject tothe purchase option in the sublease wasrendered unenforceable by the statuteof frauds. Only the parties to a contracthave the right to complain of a breachthereof; and if they are satisfied with thedisposition that has been made of it andall claims under it, a third person has noright to insist that it has been broken. Thejudgment is reversed in part, affirmed inpart, and remanded.Breof BNK Texas LP v. D.H. Hill Advisors Inc.Houston’s 14th Court of AppealsApril 17, 2012; No. 14-11-00351-CVThis is a breach-of-contract case concerninga commercial lease. The trialcourt rendered a take-nothing judgmentagainst the landlord. To prove a mutualmistake, the evidence must show that bothparties were acting under the same misunderstandingof the same material fact. Thetrial court’s judgment is affirmed.Hardy v. BennefieldTyler Court of AppealsApril 18, 2012; No. 12-11-00223-CVThe appellant appeals a summaryjudgment vesting the mineral estate in 184acres of land in San Augustine County inWesley Bennefield. The party asserting amutual mistake must show 1. a mistakeof fact, 2. held mutually by the parties, 3.which materially effects the agreed uponexchange. The trial court’s judgment isreversed and remanded.continued on page 14

14 TEXAS lAWYErApril 30, 2012continued from page 13TortsPhillips v. Texas Department of CriminalJusticeEl Paso Court of AppealsApril 18, 2012; No. 08-11-00240-CVThe pro se appellant appeals thetrial court’s order granting the TexasDepartment of Criminal Justice’s plea tothe jurisdiction and dismissing with prejudicethe causes of action against TDCJ. Theappellant, an inmate, severed his fingerwhile operating a meat saw. The appellantwas unable to establish that the meat sawproximately caused his injury. The trialcourt’s judgment is affirmed.Courts of Appeals — CriminalCriminal LawDe Leon v. StateSan Antonio Court of AppealsApril 18, 2012; No. 04-11-00295-CRA jury found the appellant guilty ofmurder. The jury’s finding of no suddenpassion is not against the great weight ofthe evidence. The jury could have found theappellant’s testimony was merely an attemptto paint himself as a victim rather than aperpetrator out to revenge an earlier attack.The trial court’s judgment is affirmed.Frangias v. StateHouston’s 14th Court of AppealsApril 19, 2012; No. 14-10-01090-CRThe appellant appeals his convictionfor alleged sexual assault. The appellantcontends his counsel was ineffective by notsecuring a witness’ presence or to preservehis testimony via a videotaped deposition.The record does not affirmatively showthat defense counsel’s conduct fell outsidethe broad range of prevailing professionalnorms. The trial court’s judgmentis affirmed.Herrera v. StateHouston’s 14th Court of AppealsApril 17, 2012; No. 14-11-00069-CRThe appellant was convicted of intentionallyor knowingly causing seriousbodily injury to his six-week-old son, J.H.,resulting in the baby’s death. Intent can beinferred from the extent of the injuries tothe victim, the method used to produce theinjuries, and the relative size and strengthof the parties. The trial court’s judgmentis affirmed.James v. StateHouston’s 1st Court of AppealsApril 19, 2012; No. 01-10-00693-CRA jury convicted the appellant of allegedaggravated robbery. The visible presenceof a deadly weapon on a criminal actor, evenif it is not menacingly pointed at another,satisfies the statutory element of use orexhibition. The trial court’s judgment isaffirmed as modified.Jessop v. StateAustin Court of AppealsApril 19, 2012; No. 03-10-00078-CRThe appellant and nine other membersof the Fundamentalist Church of JesusChrist of Latter Day Saints (FLDS), livingat the YFZ (Yearning for Zion) Ranchin Schleicher County were indicted foralleged sexual assault of a child. Theevidence is sufficient. The trial court didnot abuse its discretion in admitting DNApaternity evidence, church and familyrecords recovered from the YFZ Ranch, orthe testimony of several witnesses duringthe punishment phase of trial. The judgmentof conviction is affirmed.Medina v. StateTexarkana Court of AppealsApril 17, 2012; No. 06-11-00214-CRThe appellant was convicted by a juryfor alleged aggravated robbery enhancedby a prior felony conviction and with adeadly weapon finding. A defendant whotestifies may generally be impeached byevidence of a prior felony conviction orconviction of a crime involving moral turpitudeif the probative value of admitting theevidence outweighs its prejudicial effect.The trial court’s judgment is affirmed.State v. HarborHouston’s 1st Court of AppealsApril 19, 2012; No. 01-11-00574-CRThe state appeals the trial court’sdismissal of the state’s charge againstappellee. Trial courts do not have aninherent authority to dismiss a charginginstrument without the consent of the state.The trial court’s judgment is reversed andremanded.5th U.S. CircuitCourt of AppealsCriminal LawUnited States v. AbrahemApril 20, 2012; No. 11-50166The appellant appeals his convictionof allegedly knowingly making a materialfalse statement to Department ofDefense security personnel in violationof 18 U.S.C. §1001(a)(2). A statement to adecision maker in a military hospital thatthe speaker is the lawyer for a restrictedmilitary prisoner is the type of statementcapable of influencing the decision makerto allow the speaker to visit the patient andthe protocols in place did not affect thestatement’s materiality. The focus of materialityis whether the statement is of a typethat would naturally tend to influence or iscapable of influencing the decision maker.The conviction is affirmed.United States v. Chemical & MetalIndustries Inc.April 17, 2012; No. 11-30327This appeal is from a judgment of convictionand the sentence of a corporationfor negligent endangerment that resultedin death. The government generally maynot present new evidence on remandwhen reversal is required due to thefailure to present evidence originally. Thefine is modified to $500,000 and the restitutionaward is vacated. The judgment ofconviction and sentence as modified areaffirmed.David Popple is an attorney andfreelancer in Grand Prairie.presentsClients, Cases and the CourtroomWinning Tips From Top Trial LawyersLisa BlueMark LanierMay 23, 2012CityPlace Conference & Event Center — Dallas8 a.m. to 10 a.m.Join Texas Lawyer’s editorial department and noted Texas trial lawyers W. Mark Lanier and Lisa Blue asthey discuss winning litigation tips and techniques, the best approach to settlement negotiations, andhow to handle discovery, jury selection and expert witnesses, among other things.Texas Lawyer Subscribers: $50 • Nonsubscribers: $60 • At the door: $70This event is pending 1.5 hours of CLE.To register, visit www.TexasLawyerEvents.com or call 214.744.7764.Sponsored By

ApRiL 30, 2012TEXAS LAWYER 15Jury Awards $13 Million in Defamation Suit Filed By Attorney, Wifecontinued from page 1their respective businesses; and causedthem psychological, emotional and financialtrauma. Topix.com was not a party tothe defamation suit.At the time the Leshers filed the defamationsuit, they didn’t know who wasposting the comments online, says MeaganHassan, a partner in the Houston officeof Demond & Hassan who representsthe Leshers and was their lead counsel attrial. “We had suspicions, but it could havebeen a number of different people. But wecouldn’t reverse engineer anyone,” shesays. [See “Attorney, Wife Seek Identities ofAnonymous Online Posters,” Texas Lawyer,Feb. 23, 2009, page 1.]The plaintiffs alleged in their fifthamended petition that 599 of the defamatorycomments posted about them onTopix.com came from computers in twolocations: a house in Clarksville and a FortWorth salvage yard called Apache Truckand Van Parts. The home, the salvage yardand the computers were owned by GeraldCoyel, aka “Jerry Coyel,” who is marriedto Shannon Coyel, the plaintiffs alleged. In2007, Rhonda Lesher testified against both“We anticipateda verdict that willgive a message.But this gavea tremendousmessage toanonymousposters,” MarkLesher says.Meagan Hassan represents the plaintiffsin Lesher, et al. v. Doescher, et al.of the Coyels in a child custody case, theLeshers alleged, among other things.The Leshers subsequently amendedtheir petition in the defamation suit toinclude Jerry Coyel and Shannon Coyel;Charlie Doescher and Pat Doescher,employees of Jerry Coyel who worked atApache Truck and Van Parts; and others.(Jurors in Lesher found no liability on PatDoescher’s part.)All of the defendants denied the allegationsin responses and filed no-evidencesummary judgment motions on March 1alleging the Leshers could not prove theircase. The trial judge denied the defendants’motions.Most of the anonymous names connectedwith the 599 comments in evidencewere common and not traceable to a nameddefendant, the plaintiffs alleged. Howeverone name used was unusual: “ilbedipt.” Thename was associated with the computer atthe salvage yard, the plaintiffs alleged.“Plaintiffs herein allege that CharlieDoescher and/or Pat Doescher areresponsible for at least some (if not all)of the defamatory posts in question, specificallythose attached to the usernamejohn everett‘ilbedipt,’ ” the plaintiffs wrote in their fifthamended petition.None of the defendants testified attrial, Hassan says, and the computer thatCharlie Doescher allegedly had used wasdestroyed prior to trial.“We read a piece of Charlie Doescher’sdeposition into the record [at trial]. Duringthe deposition we asked what had happenedto the hard drives. And he claimedwhen a computer broke they just crushedit,” Hassan says. “Our point to the jury wasvery few people take the time to crush theircomputers if they are not trying to hidesomething.”William Demond, a partner in Demond& Hassan who also represents the Leshers,says he testified as a fact witness in thecase at trial because he gathered many ofthe documents used in evidence. Evidencepresented at trial about the commentsconnected to “ilbedipt” was important, hesays.“Once you enter that information inevidence, the jury just connected the dotsand it gave them the corroboration theyneeded,” Demond says.The defense rested in the case withoutputting on any evidence, Hassan says.R. Wesley Tidwell, a partner in Paris’Ellis & Tidwell who represented all of thedefendants, declines comment.The jury certificate indicates the verdictwas not unanimous and notes 10 jurorsagreed to each answer on the jury form.The jury found that Jerry Coyel, ShannonCoyel, and Charlie Doescher had publisheddefamatory comments about the Leshers,but decided that Pat Doescher did notpublish defamatory comments.Of the $13.7 million the jury awardedthe plaintiffs in actual damages, $3.6 millionwas for injury to Mark Lesher’s reputationand $640,000 was for injury to RhondaLesher’s reputation. The rest of the $13.7million was for mental anguish, loss ofbusiness and lost earnings, among otherthings.Mark Lesher of Lesher & Associatesnow practices primarily out of his Texarkanaand Mount Pleasant offices. He says thatsince he and his wife filed the defamationsuit, he has closed his practice in Clarksvilleand Rhonda closed her beauty salon there.The couple spent $200,000 in legal fees topursue the defamation case, he says.“Bad news travels real quick, no matterwhat your reputation is,” Mark Lesher says.“But the bottom line is my wife and I feellike we have been finally vindicated by aTarrant County jury. And frankly we wereshocked by the amount. We anticipated averdict that will give a message. But thisgave a tremendous message to anonymousposters.”TEXASLAWYER.COMWEB EXTRADocuments related toLesher, et al. v.Doescher, et al. are onlineat www.texaslawyer.com.Look for the link within theonline version of this article.2012 Texas CourThouse Guide:An indispensable reference for thecountry’s third largest legal community.This is the only directory you’ll needfor vital contacts in the federal, state,district and county courts.We research the information youseek: court coordinators, clerks,administrators and more.www.TexasLawyerBooks.comvideoideo.comGo in-depth with Texas Lawyer reporters as theyinterview judges, lawyers and in-house counsel.Call 800-456-5484, ext. 7740 to preorder your copy today!

16 TEXAS LAWYERApRiL 30, 2012insideThe Millionaires’ ClubWhich firms’ PPP topped$1 million in 2011?SpecialReportPage 17The Profitability IndexAre equity partners reallymaking money?Page 17A Strong YearGross revenue, net income,PPP and RPL rankings.Pages 18-19Firm By FirmEnergy work, litigationboosts firms’ bottom lines.Pages 20-23Hot HubWhich firms have themost lawyers in Texas?Page 24Gross Revenue at BigTex Firms Inches Up in ’11by BRENDA SAPINO JEFFREYSbjeffreys@alm.comThe strength of the Texas economy, and the rocksolidenergy business specifically, resulted in a strongyear for the finances of large Texas firms.“We’re very fortunate to be in Texas,” says C.Wade Cooper, managing partner of Dallas-basedJackson Walker, which improved its gross revenueby 8.5 percent with $194 million in 2011 compared to$178.8 million in 2010.While work for energy clients runs the gamut,including transactional, litigation, intellectual propertyand other practice areas, leaders of the firms onthe Texas 25 consistently cited the energy business asone of the hottest areas in 2011, and one that provideda steady stream of work.Other factors led to a healthy bottom line at the25 Texas firms, including better collection of receivables,strong lateral hiring and unexpected businessin practice areas such as tax, wealth management,corporate financings and public offerings.In 2011, the 25 highest-grossing firms in Texasracked up a total gross income of $5.3 billion, whichIn 2011, “[e]verything at the firm was kicking on all cylinders,”Porter Hedges managing partner Rob Reedy says.john everett

ApRiL 30, 2012TEXAS LAWYER 17is up slightly from $5.2 billion in 2010and in 2009. Nineteen of the 25 firmsimproved their gross revenue in 2011,compared to 2010, while six brought inless revenue in 2011 than in 2010. [See“Turning the Corner,” Texas Lawyer,April 25, 2011, page 22.]Porter Hedges of Houston postedone of the strongest across-the-boardimprovements in finances in 2011. Thefirm’s gross income improved 15.4percent in 2011, reaching $77.2 million,and its net increased 20.1 percent to$40 million in 2011. Average revenueper lawyer improved 11.9 percent to$780,000 and the firm’s average profitsper partner crossed the magic milliondollarmark, coming in at $1,061,000,up 8.4 percent. [See “The Millionaires’Club,” this page.]Everything at the firm was kickingon all cylinders, managing partner RobReedy says.“We had some big deals and somebig cases that were big drivers for us.The energy business was extraordinary,but we had success throughout thefirm, a lot of high quality work, stuffthat’s really fun and important to ourclients,” Reedy says.He says the firm also benefited fromthe addition of an intellectual propertysection in 2011.Many of the firms on the Texas 25that are so-called regional firms —those with all or most of their lawyersin Texas — posted strong financialsin 2011. That’s reflective of the strongTexas economy and the booming energyindustry, but also of regional firms’growth as they pick up lateral hireswho want to work at a place with lowerbilling rates compared to internationalfirms. [See “BigTex Roots,” page 24.]“Our firm does not have offices allover the world. We don’t even haveoffices all around the country. Becauseof that, we do have opportunity tobe priced accordingly,” says KevinSullivan, chief executive officer ofWinstead of Dallas, which brought onmore lateral hires than any other largeTexas firm in 2011.An improved Texas economy notonly means more work for lawyers,particularly in the deals area, but clientsin better shape to pay their bills.Dallas firm Kane Russell Coleman& Logan, which improved its grossrevenue to $39 million, up 15.4 percentfrom $33.8 million, posted oneof its strongest realization rates ever,says chairman Christopher Pappas ofHouston. “The key was the attorneysfocusing on their clients and their practices— send your bills out and collectyour bills,” he says.The list of 25 highest-grossing firmsin 2011 is a bit different from last year’slist. Godwin Ronquillo of Dallas, whichhas appeared on the list before but notlast year’s, grew significantly in 2011and moved back onto the annual ranking.The firm’s gross revenue in 2011was $50 million. Brown McCarroll ofAustin slipped off the list.Only firms based in Texas areincluded in Texas Lawyer’s AnnualReport on Firm Finance.While total gross revenue for the 25firms improved a bit during 2011, netThe Millionaires’ ClubProfits per partner topped $1 million in 2011 atthese nine Texas-based firms.Godwin Ronquillo $1,917,000Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld $1,685,000Susman Godfrey $1,500,000Baker Botts $1,392,000Vinson & Elkins $1,354,000Porter Hedges $1,053,000Andrews Kurth $1,041,000Locke Lord $1,038,000Bracewell & Giuliani $1,018,000income slipped to a total of $2.1 billion,compared to a total of $2.2 billion in2010 and in 2009.Profits per partner averaged $924,000in 2011, up 3.9 percent when comparedto an average of $889,000 in 2010.Revenue per lawyer averaged$668,000 in 2011, the same as in 2010.Those four measures in the AnnualReport on Firm Finance — gross revenue,net income, PPP and RPL — helpdescribe each firm’s financial performanceand provide a means to comparethem. The gross revenue chart is themaster list for the report. [See “FirmFinance,” page 18.]This year is the 26th year TexasLawyer has published the AnnualReport on Firm Finance. The first waspublished in 1987, when it includedthe 10 highest-grossing firms in Texasin 1986.As it has for the past 14 years, AkinGump Strauss Hauer & Feld is thehighest-grossing firm on the list in2011, with gross revenue of $770 million,up 4.5 percent from $736.5 millionin 2010. The next four firms on the listare Houston firms Vinson & Elkins,Fulbright & Jaworski and Baker Bottsand Dallas-based Locke Lord. GodwinRonquillo’s gross revenue improved themost, with its $50 million gross revenueup 119.2 percent compared to $22.8million in 2010. Houston firms PorterHedges and Looper Reed & McGraw,along with Kane Russell Coleman &Logan of Dallas, posted double-digitincreases in gross revenue in 2011 comparedto 2010. Houston-based SusmanGodfrey’s gross declined the most,dropping 27.3 percent to $125 millionin 2011 compared to $172 million in2010.Nineteen of the firms improved theirgross revenue in 2011, while gross revenuedeclined at six of the firms.Akin Gump also topped the netincome chart with $278 million, up1.8 percent when compared to $273.1million in 2010, followed by V&E,Baker Botts, Fulbright and Locke Lord.Godwin Ronquillo posted the largestincrease in net income with $23 million,up 191.1 percent compared to $7.9million the year before. Porter Hedges,Kane Russell and Jackson Walker alsorang up double-digit increases in netincome. Susman Godfrey had the largestdecline of 33.3 percent dropping to$90 million last year compared to $135million in 2010.Fifteen of the firms improved theirnet income in 2011, while net incomedeclined at the other 10 firms.Godwin Ronquillo topped the PPPchart with an average of $1,917,000,up 215.3 percent when comparedto $608,000 in 2010. PPP at a numberof firms improved by more than10 percent: Kane Russell, JacksonWalker, Fort Worth firm Kelly Hart &Hallman, and Dallas firms Winsteadand Carrington, Coleman, Sloman &Blumenthal. The largest decline inPPP was at Susman Godfrey, down38.9 percent to $1,500,000 in 2011 from$2,455,000 in 2010.Average PPP improved at 17 of thefirms, declined at seven, and was flat atBracewell & Giuliani of Houston.Even though its RPL declined by28.1 percent, Susman Godfrey tops theRPL chart with average of $1,359,000 in2011, compared to $1,890,000 in 2010.Four firms posted double-digit increasesin RPL: Porter Hedges, GodwinRonquillo, Thompson & Knight andLooper Reed.Nineteen of the firms posted anincrease in RPL in 2011, and the othersix had declines.The Annual Report on Firm Financealso includes a Profitability Index thatshows whether equity partners in afirm are taking home more or less thanaverage RPL. [See “Profitability Index,”this page.]The report also includes a firm-byfirmanalysis that gives some insightto help explain financial results fromeach of the 25 firms. [See related charts,pages 20-23.] The fact that lawyers fromthe firms are quoted in these articlesis no indication of a firm’s cooperationwith the preparation of the AnnualReport in Firm Finance. Lawyers simplyresponded to questions about work anddevelopments at their firms in 2011.Texas Lawyer does not identify the firmsthat cooperate with our reporting byproviding financial information or thosethat do not.Those individual firm reports alsoinclude graphs that illustrate the trendline for each firm’s revenue over thepast several years. The gross revenuenumbers were collected from previousTexas Lawyer Firm Finance reports.For a few firms, numbers go back tothe first Firm Finance report in 1987,while other firms are newer to thecharts. The graphs are not on the samescale, so they should not be comparedside-by-side.All the revenue figures in the chartsare for calendar year 2011, except forGardere, whose most recent fiscalyear ended March 31, 2012. All lawyercounts are full-time equivalent for thefirm’s fiscal year.See related charts,pages 18-23.Profitability indexRank Firm 20111 Godwin Ronquillo 2.682 Susman Godfrey 1.813 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld 1.734 Baker Botts 1.685 Kane Russell Coleman & Logan 1.666 Vinson & Elkins 1.617 Bracewell & Giuliani 1.588 Kelly Hart & Hallman 1.59 (tie) Thompson & Knight 1.359 (tie) Locke Lord 1.359 (tie) Porter Hedges 1.3512 (tie) Andrews Kurth 1.3412 (tie) Jackson Walker 1.3414 (tie) Beirne, Maynard & Parsons 1.314 (tie) Winstead 1.316 (tie) Looper Reed & McGraw 1.2916 (tie) Gardere Wynne Sewell 1.2918 Haynes and Boone 1.2319 Munsch, Hardt, Kopf & Harr 1.1620Chamberlain, Hrdlicka, White,Williams & Aughtry1.1121 (tie) Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons 1.0921 (tie) Fulbright & Jaworski 1.0923Carrington, Coleman, Sloman& Blumenthal0.9424 Cox Smith Matthews 0.9125 Strasburger & Price 0.87Methodology ExplainedTo calculate a firm’s profitability TexasLawyer used the profitability index, a mathematicalformula. The formula, developedby our affiliate The American Lawyer, is :Profitability =Profits Per Partner /Revenue Per LawyerThe formula takes some of the variables– although not all – out of gross revenue,net profits, leverage or even profit-margincomparisons. It shows whether the equitypartners in a particular firm are takinghome more or less than the average revenuetheir respective lawyers are bringinginto the firm.Essentially, if the profits per partner aremore than the revenue per lawyer, the firmis producing profits for its partners. If not,the firm may need to take a hard look at itsexpenses or its leverage.Using the profitability index as a measure,22 of the firms were profitable in 2011,compared to 21 in 2010. Three firms wereunprofitable in 2011, compared to four in2010. Godwin Ronquillo of Dallas was themost profitable firm in 2011 with a profitabilityindex of 2.68, while Strasburger &Price of Dallas, with a profitability indexof .87 in 2011, was the least profitableamong the 25 highest-grossing Texasbasedfirms.— BRENDA SAPINO JEFFREYS

18 TEXAS LAWYERApRiL 30, 2012Gross revenue2011RankFirmCityLawyers/Equity PartnersGross Revenue 2011 Gross Revenue 2010 Percent Change1 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld Dallas 791/165 $770.0 million $736.5 million 4.5%2 Vinson & Elkins Houston 722/195 $607.5 million $602.7 million 0.8%3 Fulbright & Jaworski Houston 810/313 $597.5 million $625.4 million -4.5%4 Baker Botts Houston 703/185 $581.5 million $555.0 million 4.8%5 Locke Lord Dallas 540/145 $416.0 million $396.4 million 4.9%6 Haynes and Boone Dallas 493/138 $305.0 million $296.2 million 3.0%7 Bracewell & Giuliani Houston 422/84 $271.5 million $280.6 million -3.2%8 Andrews Kurth Houston 349/98 $270.0 million $268.0 million 0.7%9 Thompson & Knight Dallas 291/89 $200.0 million $198.8 million 0.6%10 Jackson Walker Dallas 321/96 $194.0 million $178.8 million 8.5%11 Winstead Dallas 258/100 $152.8 million $143.8 million 6.3%12 Gardere Wynne Sewell Dallas 231/66 $149.5 million $157.5 million -5.1%13 Susman Godfrey Houston 92/60 $125.0 million $172.0 million -27.3%14 Porter Hedges Houston 99/38 $77.2 million $66.9 million 15.4%15 Strasburger & Price Dallas 169/66 $75.8 million $75.9 million -0.1%16 Chamberlain, Hrdlicka, White, Williams & Aughtry Houston 105/40 $64.9 million $63.7 million 1.9%17 Kelly Hart & Hallman Fort Worth 126/50 $64.5 million $63.5 million 1.6%18 Cox Smith Matthews San Antonio 130/48 $61.2 million $56.7 million 7.9%19 Munsch, Hardt, Kopf & Harr Dallas 103/33 $56.3 million $53.3 million 5.6%20 Carrington, Coleman, Sloman & Blumenthal Dallas 62/29 $50.2 million $48.4 million 3.7%21 Godwin Ronquillo Dallas 70/12 $50.0 million $22.8 million 119.3%22 Looper Reed & McGraw Houston 111/17 $45.9 million $37.8 million 21.4%23 Beirne, Maynard & Parsons Houston 62/15 $41.5 million $43.5 million -4.6%24 Kane Russell Coleman & Logan Dallas 76/17 $39.0 million $33.8 million 15.4%25 Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons Dallas 133/32 $37.7 million $37.0 million 1.9%Profits Per Partner2011RankFirmFirm FinanceCityLawyers/Equity PartnersProfits Per Partner 2011 Profits Per Partner 2010 Percent Change1 Godwin Ronquillo Dallas 70/12 $1,917,000 $608,000 215.3%2 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld Dallas 791/165 $1,685,000 $1,606,000 4.9%3 Susman Godfrey Houston 92/60 $1,500,000 $2,455,000 -38.9%4 Baker Botts Houston 703/185 $1,392,000 $1,373,000 1.4%5 Vinson & Elkins Houston 722/195 $1,354,000 $1,347,000 0.5%6 Porter Hedges Houston 99/38 $1,053,000 $979,000 7.6%7 Andrews Kurth Houston 349/98 $1,041,000 $1,132,000 -8.0%8 Locke Lord Dallas 540/145 $1,038,000 $978,000 6.1%9 Bracewell & Giuliani Houston 422/84 $1,018,000 $1,019,000 0.0%10 Thompson & Knight Dallas 291/89 $927,000 $948,000 -2.2%11 Beirne, Maynard & Parsons Houston 62/15 $873,000 $888,000 -1.7%12 Kane Russell Coleman & Logan Dallas 76/14 $853,000 $760,000 12.2%13 Gardere Wynne Sewell Dallas 231/66 $835,000 $854,000 -2.2%14 Jackson Walker Dallas 321/96 $807,000 $690,000 17.0%15 Fulbright & Jaworski Houston 810/313 $802,000 $876,000 -8.4%16 Winstead Dallas 258/100 $769,000 $686,000 12.1%17 Kelly Hart & Hallman Fort Worth 126/50 $768,000 $696,000 10.3%18 Carrington, Coleman, Sloman & Blumenthal Dallas 62/29 $762,000 $687,000 10.9%19 Haynes and Boone Dallas 493/138 $760,000 $740,000 2.7%20 Chamberlain, Hrdlicka, White, Williams & Aughtry Houston 105/40 $683,000 $673,000 1.5%21 Munsch, Hardt, Kopf & Harr Dallas 103/33 $633,000 $611,000 3.6%22 Looper Reed & McGraw Houston 111/17 $535,000 $531,000 0.8%23 Cox Smith Matthews San Antonio 130/48 $427,000 $409,000 4.4%24 Strasburger & Price Dallas 169/66 $392,000 $400,000 -2.0%25 Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons Dallas 133/32 $309,000 $294,000 5.1%

ApRiL 30, 2012TEXAS LAWYER 19Firm Financenet income2011Rankrevenue Per Lawyer2011RankFirmFirmCityCityLawyers/Equity PartnersLawyers/Equity PartnersNet Income 2011 Net Income 2010 Percent Change1 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld Dallas 791/165 $278.0 million $273.1 million 1.8%2 Vinson & Elkins Houston 722/195 $264.0 million $269.4 million -2.0%3 Baker Botts Houston 703/185 $257.5 million $245.8 million 4.8%4 Fulbright & Jaworski Houston 810/313 $251.0 million $276.9 million -9.4%5 Locke Lord Dallas 540/145 $150.5 million $138.9 million 8.4%6 Haynes and Boone Dallas 493/138 $105.0 million $102.1 million 2.8%7 Andrews Kurth Houston 349/98 $102.0 million $103.0 million -1.0%8 Susman Godfrey Houston 92/60 $90.0 million $135.0 million -33.3%9 Bracewell & Giuliani Houston 422/84 $85.5 million $92.7 million -7.8%10 Thompson & Knight Dallas 291/89 $82.5 million $85.3 million -3.4%11 Jackson Walker Dallas 321/96 $77.5 million $66.2 million 17.1%12 Winstead Dallas 258/100 $76.9 million $72.7 million 5.8%13 Gardere Wynne Sewell Dallas 231/66 $55.1 million $63.2 million -12.8%14 Porter Hedges Houston 99/38 $40.0 million $33.3 million 20.1%15 Kelly Hart & Hallman Fort Worth 126/50 $38.4 million $36.2 million 5.7%16 Chamberlain, Hrdlicka, White, Williams & Aughtry Houston 105/40 $27.3 million $26.9 million 1.5%17 Strasburger & Price Dallas 169/66 $25.9 million $26.0 million -0.4%18 Godwin Ronquillo Dallas 70/12 $23.0 million $7.9 million 191.1%19 Carrington, Coleman, Sloman & Blumenthal Dallas 62/29 $22.1 million $21.3 million 3.8%20 Munsch, Hardt, Kopf & Harr Dallas 103/33 $20.9 million $22.0 million -5.0%21 Cox Smith Matthews San Antonio 130/48 $20.5 million $19.2 million 6.8%22 Kane Russell Coleman & Logan Dallas 76/17 $14.5 million $11.4 million 27.2%23 Beirne, Maynard & Parsons Houston 62/15 $13.1 million $14.2 million -7.7%24 Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons Dallas 133/32 $9.9 million $9.7 million 2.1%25 Looper Reed & McGraw Houston 111/17 $9.1 million $8.5 million 7.1%Revenue PerLawyer 2011Revenue PerLawyer 2010Percent Change1 Susman Godfrey Houston 92/60 $1,359,000 $1,890,000 -28.1%2 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld Dallas 791/165 $973,000 $939,000 3.6%3 Vinson & Elkins Houston 722/195 $841,000 $844,000 -0.5%4 Baker Botts Houston 703/185 $827,000 $789,000 4.8%5 Carrington, Coleman, Sloman & Blumenthal Dallas 62/29 $810,000 $781,000 3.7%6 Porter Hedges Houston 99/38 $780,000 $697,000 11.9%7 Andrews Kurth Houston 349/98 $774,000 $755,000 2.5%8 Locke Lord Dallas 540/145 $770,000 $727,000 5.9%9 Fulbright & Jaworski Houston 810/313 $738,000 $743,000 -0.7%10 Godwin Ronquillo Dallas 70/12 $714,000 $616,000 15.9%11 Thompson & Knight Dallas 291/89 $687,000 $623,000 10.3%12 Beirne, Maynard & Parsons Houston 62/15 $669,000 $702,000 -4.7%13 Gardere Wynne Sewell Dallas 231/66 $647,000 $656,000 -1.4%14 Bracewell & Giuliani Houston 422/84 $643,000 $638,000 0.8%15 Haynes and Boone Dallas 493/138 $619,000 $602,000 3.2%16 Chamberlain, Hrdlicka, White, Williams & Aughtry Houston 105/40 $618,000 $601,000 2.8%17 Jackson Walker Dallas 321/96 $604,000 $564,000 7.1%18 Winstead Dallas 258/100 $592,000 $543,000 9.0%19 Munsch, Hardt, Kopf & Harr Dallas 103/33 $547,000 $503,000 8.7%20 Kane Russell Coleman & Logan Dallas 76/17 $513,000 $469,000 9.4%21 Kelly Hart & Hallman Fort Worth 126/50 $512,000 $496,000 3.2%22 Cox Smith Matthews San Antonio 130/48 $471,000 $465,000 1.3%23 Strasburger & Price Dallas 169/66 $449,000 $446,000 0.7%24 Looper Reed & McGraw Houston 111/17 $414,000 $367,000 12.8%25 Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons Dallas 133/32 $283,000 $294,000 -3.7%CAVEAT READERSome of these figures are official;some of them are not. We're not tellingwhich is which.By official, we mean that thenumbers were provided by management.By unofficial, they were piecedtogether through our reporting, andfirm leaders were informed of the resultsof that reporting and given theopportunity to respond.We don't tell which numbers areofficial and which ones are informedestimates for a simple reason: Wepromise the firms that do cooperatethat they will not be identified.Thus we can assure our readersthat every number on these chartsis an informed estimate with whichwe feel confident, based on researchand numerous interviews with a varietyof knowledgeable people associatedwith the firms.This is the only project for whichwe use this method of reportingwithout attribution. We do this becausecomprehensive financial datais a cornerstone of our businessof-lawcoverage. Firms are privatelyowned and are under no obligationto report their financial data, and sowe use every bit of information wecan find about a firm's finances tocome up with results in which we areconfident.METHODOLOGYTo arrive at the 25 highest-grossingfirms, we surveyed 29 firms that,based on the number of attorneysand reputation, appeared to generateenough revenue to be included. Onlyfirms based in Texas are included.Profits per partner are based onequity partnership. Retired partnersand of counsel are not counted aspartners, but rather as salaried employees,like associates.We use average FTE (full-timeequivalent) in 2011 for the lawyercounts. The financial information isfor the year 2011, except for GardereWynne Sewell, which has a fiscalyear ending March 31, 2012.Gross revenue and net incomefigures are rounded to the nearest$100,000. Figures for revenue perlawyer and for profits per partner arerounded to the nearest $1,000.See relatedcharts,pages 20-23.

ApRiL 30, 2012TEXAS LAWYER 21Fulbright & JaworskiHoustonFirmwide Lawyer Count: 810Gardere Wynne SewellDallasFirmwide Lawyer Count: 231Godwin RonquilloDallasFirmwide Lawyer Count: 70Haynes and BooneDallasFirmwide Lawyer Count: 4932011 StatsGross Revenue: $597.5 million 4.5%Net Income: $251.0 million 9.4%Revenue Per Lawyer: $738,000 0.7%Profits Per Partner: $802,000 8.4%2011 StatsGross Revenue: $149.5 million 5.1%Net Income: $55.1 million 12.8 %Revenue Per Lawyer: $647,000 3.2 %Profits Per Partner: $835,000 2.9 %2011 StatsGross Revenue: $50.0 million 119.30%Net Income: $23.0 million 191.1%Revenue Per Lawyer: $714,000 15.9%Profits Per Partner: $1,917,000 215.3%2011 StatsGross Revenue: $305.0 million 3%Net Income: $105.0 million 2.9%Revenue Per Lawyer: $619,000 3.2%Profits Per Partner: $760,000 2.7%Notable in 2011According to StevenPfeiffer, chairman ofthe firm’s executivecommittee:Revenue downers –Firm had fewer lawyersand less contingent-feerevenue in 2011. Steven PfeifferNew Hires andOffice – Firm recruited 17 lateral partners,opened 17th office, this one in Pittsburgh.Missed Out – Potential client conflictsexcluded firm from legal work stemming fromDeepwater Horizon Oil spill disaster.Notable in 2011According to managingpartner StephenGood:Strong PracticeAreas – energy,government,international tax andreal estateStephen GoodHot Region – Europeand AsiaHeadcount Effect – Slight decrease inlawyers due, in part, to retirements, whichled gross revenue to drop.mark grahamNotable in 2011According to chairmanand CEO Don Godwin:Strong Practice Area– litigationNew Office – Firmopened a 15-lawyerNew Orleans officein 2011 due to Don Godwinrepresentation ofHouston’s Halliburton Corp. related to theGulf oil spill litigation.Future Plans – Firm plans to hire morelawyers and grow its family law practice.Notable in 2011According to managingpartner TerryConner:Strong PracticeAreas – energy,investment funds,private equityBill Issues – The Terry Connerfirm continues to feelpressure on realization rates and discountedits rates to help clients.Office Growth – Firm doubled the size ofits New York and California office.700Fulbright & Jaworski210Gardere Wynne Sewell60Godwin Ronquillo350Haynes and BooneGROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)600500400300200100GROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)180150120906030GROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)5040302010GROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)300250200150100501987 YEAR20111986 YEAR20112010 YEAR20111988 YEAR2011continued on page 22Now Accepting Nominations ForTHEGO-TOGUIDETEXAS’TOPTOPOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONOTCHLAWYERSOThe Go-To Guidewill include the TOP FIVE TEXAS LAWYERS in each of 16 practiceareas. This special Texas Lawyermagazine will be published on Dec. 10, 2012.To nominate a Texas attorney, go to www.texaslawyer.com/goto.Nominations must be received by 5 p.m. on May 14, 2012.Ed FussaFirst Vice PresidentFinancial AdvisorBlake JonesFinancial Planning SpecialistFinancial Advisor717 Texas Avenue, Suite 3050Houston, TX 77002713-658-2777Ed.fussa@mssb.comwww.fa.smithbarney.com/thelawfirmgroup/The Law FirmGroup atMorgan StanleySmith BarneyThe Law Firm Group at Morgan StanleySmith Barney specializes in providing financialservices and products to the legal community.Our understanding of how law firms conductbusiness and what financial resources arerequired is based on years of in-depth experience.We work with individual attorneys—from newassociate to senior partner—and can meetyour lending, banking, credit and investmentmanagement needs as they evolve.Backed by the global reach ofMorgan Stanley Smith Barney, we havethe knowledge and resources to helpmaintain balance within your investments.We offer a comprehensive approach thathelps you capitalize on opportunitieswhile working with you to identifypossible risks, their possible effect on yourportfolio and strategies to minimize theirimpact. Meet with us to learn more.© 2012 Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC. Member SIPC. NY CS 7064098 03/12MECHJOB INFORMATIONPROJ. NO.: 7064098MSSB Chin Law FirmJOB NAME:Group AdSPECIFICATIONSTRIM SIZE: 5" × 6.5"FINISHED SIZE: 5" × 6.5"BLEED: NABINDERY: NANOTESCREATIVE SERVICES180 Varick Street, 3rd FloorDESCRIPTION:PAPER:MODIFIED BY

22 TEXAS LAWYERApRiL 30, 2012Jackson WalkerDallasFirmwide Lawyer Count: 3212011 StatsGross Revenue: $194.0 million 8.5%Net Income: $77.5 million 17.1%Revenue Per Lawyer: $604,000 7.1%Profits Per Partner: $807,000 17.0%Notable in 2011According tomanaging partnerC. Wade Cooper:Strong PracticeAreas – energy andlitigation, wealthprotectionChange Is Good C. Wade Cooper– Lateral hires andpotential changes in U.S. Tax Code boostwealth-protection practice.The Scoop – Good firm financials due tosolid year sweetened with a contingent fee.Kane RussellColeman & LoganDallasFirmwide Lawyer Count: 762011 StatsGross Revenue: $39.0 million 15.4%Net Income: $14.5 million 27.2%Revenue Per Lawyer: $513,000 9.4%Profits Per Partner: $853,000 12.2%Notable in 2011According to presidentRay Kane:Strong PracticeAreas – litigation,bankruptcy andtransactionsInternational Work– Firm had a lot of Ray Kanework in China for U.S.clients and in China and United States forChinese clients.Big Accomplishment – Firm’s realizationrate improved in 2011.mark grahamKelly Hart & HallmanFort WorthFirmwide Lawyer Count: 1262011 StatsGross Revenue: $64.5 million 1.6%Net Income: $38.4 million 5.7%Revenue Per Lawyer: $512,000 3.2 %Profits Per Partner: $768,000 10.3 %Notable in 2011According to firmfounder Dee Kelly Sr.:Strong PracticeAreas – energy,corporate andlitigationHot Region – FortWorthDee Kelly Sr.Staying Home –Representing oil and gas companies inBarnett Shale-related litigation in NorthTexas continues to be profitable for the firm.Locke LordDallasFirmwide Lawyer Count: 5402011 StatsGross Revenue: $416.0 million 4.9%Net Income: $150.5 million 8.4%Revenue Per Lawyer: $770,000 5.9%Profits Per Partner: $1,038,000 6.1%Notable in 2011According to chairwomanJerry Clements:Strong Practice Areas– energy, corporate,bankruptcy, white-collarcrime defense, realestate investment trustsand litigationJerry ClementsInvestments – lateralhiring, particularly in Texas, Chicago andCalifornia; new Hong Kong office; groundworklaid for early 2012 opening of London officeAccomplishments – Firm’s focus on improvingrevenue succeeded, and profits per partnertopped the million-dollar mark.gittingsGROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)200175150125100755025Jackson WalkerGROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)40302010Kane Russell Coleman & LoganGROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)70605040302010Kelly Hart & HallmanGROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)500400300200100Locke Lord1988 YEAR20112010 YEAR20112003 YEAR20112007 YEAR2011Looper Reed & McGrawHoustonFirmwide Lawyer Count: 111Munsch Hardt Kopf & HarrDallasFirmwide Lawyer Count: 103Porter HedgesHoustonFirmwide Lawyer Count: 99Strasburger & PriceDallasFirmwide Lawyer Count: 1692011 StatsGross Revenue: $45.9 million 21.40%Net Income: $9.1 million 7.1%Revenue Per Lawyer: $414,000 12.8%Profits Per Partner: $535,000 .80%2011 StatsGross Revenue: $56.3 million 5.6%Net Income: $20.9 million 5.0%Revenue Per Lawyer: $547,000 8.7%Profits Per Partner: $633,000 3.6%2011 StatsGross Income: $77.2 million 15.4%Net Income: $40.0 million 20.1%Revenue Per Lawyer: $780,000 11.9%Profits Per Partner: $1,053,000 7.6%2011 StatsGross Revenue: $75.8 million -0.1%Net Income: $25.9 million .40%Revenue Per Lawyer: $449,000 .30%Profits Per Partner: $392,000 2.9%Notable in 2011According to presidentand managing directorJ. Cary Gray:Strong PracticeAreas – commerciallitigation and oil andgasLots of Work – J. Cary GrayExpansion of the oiland gas industry has been important to thefirm.Growth Opportunity – Firm sees growth in2012 for its intellectual property section.Notable in 2011According to chairmanand chief executiveofficer Glenn Callison:Strong PracticeAreas – commerciallitigation, bankruptcyNew Hires/PracticeArea – Two lateral Glenn Callisonpartners joined thefirm in Dallas to launch immigration practice;transactional practices also rebounded.Bottom-Line Bump – Firm saw improvedrealization in billings due to fewer clientdiscounts.Notable in 2011According to managingpartner RobReedy:Strong Practice Area– energy lawNew Hires/PracticeArea – Firm hiredlaterals to launch Rob Reedyintellectual propertypractice.New Benchmark – Profits per partnerpassed $1 million mark.john everettNotable in 2011According to managingpartner DanButcher:Strong PracticeAreas – corporateand businesslitigation, real estateand financial services Dan ButcherHot Region – SanAntonioNew Office – Firm acquired San Antonio’sOppenheimer Blend to form StrasburgerPrice Oppenheimer Blend.mark grahamGROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)5040302010Looper Reed & McGrawGROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)7560453015Munsch Hardt Kopf & HarrGROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)8070605040302010Porter HedgesGROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)908070605040302010Strasburger & Price2008 YEAR20112003 YEAR20112003 YEAR20111987 YEAR2011

ApRiL 30, 2012TEXAS LAWYER 23Susman GodfreyHoustonFirmwide Lawyer Count: 922011 StatsGross Revenue: $125.0 million 27.3%Net Income: $90.0 million 33.3%Revenue Per Lawyer: $1,359,000 28.1%Profits Per Partner: $1,500,000 38.9%Notable in 2011According to comanagingpartnerNeal Manne:Strong PracticeAreas: commerciallitigation, especiallyantitrust, intellectualproperty, energy Neal Mannelitigation and financialindustry litigationHot Regions – Firm’s five offices had greatyears.New Hires – Firm hired more lawyers,including lateral associates.Thompson & KnightDallasFirmwide Lawyer Count: 2912011 StatsGross Revenue: $200.0 million 0.6%Net Income: $82.5 million 3.4%Revenue Per Lawyer: $687,000 10.3%Profits Per Partner: $927,000 2.2%Notable in 2011According to managingpartner EmilyParker:Strong PracticeAreas – energy,including energyfinance andtransactional work, Emily Parkerand intellectualproperty litigationGrowth Practice Areas – commercialmortgage-backed securities and health lawThe Big Positive – Partners pleased with10.3 percent increase in revenue per lawyer.Thompson, Coe,Cousins & IronsDallasFirmwide Lawyer Count: 1332011 StatsGross Revenue: $37.7 million 1.9%Net Income: $9.9 million 2.1 %Revenue Per Lawyer: $283,000 3.7%Profits Per Partner: $309,000 5.1%Notable in 2011According to managingpartner JackCleaveland:Strong PracticeAreas – litigationand insurance law,especially hurricanecoverageJack CleavelandUnique Niche– regulatory matters and lobbying forinsurance industry at state levelNew Hires – Lawyer headcount increasedat all Thompson, Coe offices in 2011.Vinson & ElkinsHoustonFirmwide Lawyer Count: 7222011 statsGross Revenue: $607.5 million 0.8%Net Income: $264.0 million 2.0%Revenue Per Lawyer: $841,000 0.5%Profits Per Partner: $1,354,000 0.5%Notable in 2011According to chairmanMark Kelly:Strong PracticeAreas: energytransactions, capitalmarkets, mergersand-acquisitions,real estate, finance, Mark Kellylitigation andintellectual propertyHot Region – ChinaNew Office – Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, openedin May 2011, giving the firm three offices inthe Middle East.250Susman Godfrey240Thompson & Knight40Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons700Vinson & ElkinsGROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)20015010050GROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)210180150120906030GROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)302010GROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)6005004003002001001990 YEAR20111988 YEAR20112008 YEAR20111988 YEAR2011WinsteadDallasFirmwide Lawyer Count: 2582011 StatsGross Revenue: $152.8 million 6.3%Net Income: $76.9 million 5.8%Revenue Per Lawyer: $592,000 9.0%Profits Per Partner: $769,000 12.1%Notable in 2011According to chairmanand chief executiveofficer Kevin Sullivan:New Hires – Firmhired 48 laterals in2011.Practice Highlights– Transactional work Kevin Sullivanrebounded in 2011,and litigation was equally busy.What’s Working – Approach as “superregional”firm in pricing and breadth ofpractice helped attract new clients.matt nager2012 Directory of Corporate CounselElECtroniC EDitionn ow availablE3 convenient ways to order:Online: www.TexasLawyerBooks.comE-mail: mervin@alm.comOr call: 800.456.5484, ext. 7740180Winstead150GROSS REVENUE (IN MILLIONS)120906030Available in Excel or tab delimited file.1988 YEAR2011

Martindale Ad.indd 13/3/10 9:26:31 AM24 TEXAS LAWYERBigTex RootsSome Large Firms See theLone Star State as a Hot HubFor Economic Growthby JEANNE GRAHAMjgraham@alm.comFewer than half the lawyers at the 25largest firms in the Lone Star State actuallywork in Texas offices. And only five of those25 firms are 100 percent Texasbased,meaning all their lawyerswork in Texas offices.Jackson Walker is the largestof the Texas-only firms.“We’re proud of our Texasbase . . . but we’re more thanbuckles, boots, Longhorns andbluebonnets,” says managingpartner C. Wade Cooper.In addition to Jackson Walker, the Texasonlyfirms are: Fort Worth-based Kelly Hart& Hallman; San Antonio-based Cox SmithMatthews; Dallas-based Munsch Hardt Kopf& Harr; and Houston-based Looper Reed& McGraw. The firms are listed on TheTexas 100 poster, inserted in this issue ofTexas Lawyer. The Texas 100 ranks firmsbased on the number of average full-timeequivalent lawyers in the firms’ Texas officesduring 2011.“Those firms have decided that theyhave a Texas base that is strong enough tosupport their lawyers and they don’t want totake the risk of opening a base in some otherstate,” says firm consultant William Cobb ofHouston. That risk includes higher overheadcosts, which may require the firm to adopt ahigher rate structure, Cobb says.Cooper agrees. About five years ago,the firm decided during a strategic planningprocess to focus on growing its offices statewide,he says. Although he won’t rule out thepossibility that the firm could open an outof-stateoffice someday, Cooper says keepingthe firm in Texas allows it to maintainlower overhead costs and rates, and affordsits lawyers the opportunityto see and know the firm’smanagement, he says.Jackson Walker hasoffices in six Texas cities —Austin, Dallas, Fort Worth,Houston, San Angelo andSan Antonio. With out-of-statefirms acquiring local operations,Jackson Walker hasfound it easier to recruit lateral partners,Cooper says. Texas lawyers who moved tolarge, national firms may feel they are just acog in a large machine with a less competitiverate structure, he says. “So we have a fairamount of luck attracting rivals’ [partners]who have clients who don’t need Wall Streetrates and who like the camaraderie of knowingyour partners,” he says.The other four large all-Texas firms alsocontinue to focus on growing within the LoneStar State. “Every firm of our size has hadplenty of opportunities to open out-of-state,”says Dee Kelly Jr., managing partner of KellyHart & Hallman, which has offices in Austinand Fort Worth. In each instance, Kelly Hartpartners decided they want to grow in TexasTexas Lawyers aTThesTaaTe’s LargesT FirmsApRiL 30, 2012FirmNo. of TexasLawyersNo. of LawyersFirmwidePercentage ofLawyers in TexasVinson & Elkins 490 722 67.87%Fulbright & Jaworski 481 810 59.38%Baker Botts 416 703 59.17%Haynes and Boone 387 493 78.50%Locke Lord 327 541 60.44%Jackson Walker 321 321 100.00%Andrews Kurth 295 349 84.53%Bracewell & Giuliani 294 424 69.34%Thompson & Knight 254 291 87.29%Winstead 247 258 95.74%Gardere Wynne Sewell 229 243 94.24%Jones Day* 212 2,406 8.81%Strasburger & Price** 189 201 94.03%Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld 174 791 22.00%Cox Smith Matthews 131 131 100.00%Thompson, Coe, Cousins & Irons 128 133 96.24%Kelly Hart & Hallman 126 126 100.00%Weil, Gotshal & Manges* 116 1,153 10.06%K&L Gates* 115 1,762 6.53%Greenberg Traurig* 110 1,701 6.47%Looper Reed & McGraw 109 109 100.00%King & Spalding* 104 814 12.78%McKool Smith 103 163 63.19%Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr 103 103 100.00%Hunton & Williams* 102 752 13.56%Totals 5,563 15,500 35.89%* Firm is not based in Texas.** In San Antonio, the firm is known as Strasburger Price Oppenheimer Blend.Note: The lawyer counts for Texas’ 25 largest firms are average full-time equivalent (FTE) lawyers forcalendar year 2011.Source: the firms.TEXAS LAWYERTurn your good press into great marketing!Order your reprints as published in Texas Lawyer. Contact347-227-3175 or doldakowski@alm.com.Reprints are designed in collaboration with you. Reprints are available for profiles,rankings, individual verdicts, compilations, and more. Our full suite of products arepowerful and versatile to meet your business needs, in print and digitally. Let us helpyou leverage this great press.Product Examples:IntroducingThe Power ProfileMartindale-Hubbell ® +Hard Copy ReprintsAddto your Martindale-Hubbell profile on martindale.com.E-PrintsHighlight your strengths and capabilities. Bring a powerful new perspectiveto the way existing clients and prospective clients see your firm.Make your firm’s profile come to life. Make it a Power Profile.PlaquesCall 877-257-3382 or email: reprints@ALM.comwww.almreprints.comScan barcode to get a quote.©2010 Crescendo Business Services2011_TX_QP.indd 16/17/11 4:27:51 PM

ApRiL 30, 2012TEXAS LAWYER 25rather than elsewhere, he says. “Most localbusinesses and local communities wantrepresentation where they live and work,which includes big corporations in this areatoo,” Kelly says.Merging with an out-of-state firm requiresa dramatically different business model, saysJames “Jamie” Smith, managing director ofCox Smith Matthews, which has five Texaslocations — Austin, Dallas, El Paso, McAllenand San Antonio. “From time to time we havetalked with people from outside of Texasabout joining us or linking up, but we havenot been seriously tempted,” he says.Expanding outside Texas or into largermarkets means higher costs and potentiallyhigher fees, he says. That’s something that“takes a fair amount of thought and a fairamount of consensus among the partners,”he says. “I think there are people and placesin Texas that like doing business with Texaslawyers,” Smith says. “We certainly have notyet concluded that a dramatically differentbusiness model would well suit our clientsor our lawyers.”Since 2009, the relative strength of theTexas economy and its legal market hasresulted in more out-of-state firms contactingMunsch Hardt about possible mergers,sometimes as many as several inquiriesa month, says Glenn Callison, the firm’schairman and chief executive officer. “It’sflattering and we’re always very interested tosee who is looking to come in to the Texasmarket, but thus far we have not felt the needto merge with or otherwise go outside thestate of Texas,” he says. The firm has officesin Austin, Dallas and Houston.Munsch Hardt is a member of TerraLexInc. and TAGlaw, two firm referral networks.“It certainly works well for us,” Callison says.“Rather than having an outpost of attorneysat far-flung locations, and the overhead associatedwith that, we have affiliated law firmsthat are the best in their markets, whetherits Tel Aviv or Tokyo,” he says.Looper Reed is focused exclusively ongrowth within Texas, says Michael Blachly,director of client development. “We are aTexas firm and that’s where we focus ourefforts,” he says. The firm has offices inDallas, Houston and Tyler.important to us,” he says. “It gives us credibilityas a firm knowledgeable in oil and gasand with connections in the Houston businesscommunity, which is important evenfor global energy players. . . . The capabilityof the Houston office for us is a significantdifferentiator,” he says.About 60 percent of the lawyers atFulbright & Jaworski, which was founded inHouston, are based in Texas offices, but overtime the percentage of the firm’s lawyers outsideof Texas will grow, says Steven Pfeiffer,chairman of the firm’s executive committee.“We believe you can build an internationalfirm with its roots in Texas; it’s a great callingcard as you build your firm,” Pfeiffer says.“Houston is an international city, because itis the energy capital of the world,” he says.“What we really are is a Texas-based firmthat established a national firm 20 years agoand has now become an international firm.”The firm has 17 offices, with four in Texas(Austin, Dallas, Houston and San Antonio),and six overseas.Jerry Clements, chairwoman of LockeLord, also says the firm’s energy practicehas helped it develop business worldwide.In 2007, Locke Liddell & Sapp mergedwith Chicago’s Lord Bissell & Brook. Themerged firm now has 13 offices, with threein Texas (Austin, Dallas and Houston), andtwo overseas.“Texas roots can be perceived as a realadvantage,” Clements says. “We certainlyuse our strong Texas energy practice andlong history of that energy practice in a waythat helps us attract energy business. Thisis true in banking and other areas of ourfirm.” Sixty percent of the lawyers at LockeLord, founded in Dallas, are based in Texas.Clements says that proportion will likely stayabout the same over time.Clients support the firm’s expansionnationally and internationally, because thenew offices are driven by clients’ needs,she says. “We don’t say ‘build it and theywill come,’ ” Clements says. “We say, ‘tell uswhere you want us to be.’ ”TEXASLAWYER.COMWEB EXTRATo watch a video interview withJackson Walker managingpartner C. Wade Cooper, goto www.texaslawyer.com andclick on the link within theonline version of this article.The Texas Tie That BindsLeaders with three large firms founded inTexas, but with out-of-state and internationallocations, say their Texas roots have beenan advantage in their expansions, whetherthose expansions took place five or 40 yearsago.Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld hashad out-of-state offices for more than 40years and offices overseas for more than 20years, says chairman R. Bruce McLean ofWashington, D.C. For more than a decade,only about one-fourth of the lawyers withAkin Gump, which was founded in Dallas,have been in the firm’s Texas offices,McLean says. The firm has 14 offices, withfour in Texas (Austin, Dallas, Houston andSan Antonio), and five overseas. “We like tothink of ourselves as an international firm,”he says.McLean says he expects the firm to maintainabout 25 percent of its lawyer headcountin Texas. He also notes that the firm’s Texasroots are part of its identity.Having a Houston practice gives thefirm a competitive advantage, McLean says.“Having a significant office in Houston, theenergy capital of the planet, is really, really

26 TEXAS LAWYER APRIL 30, 2012Dallas/Fort Worth800-456-5484, ext. 751•E-mail:fwilliams@alm.comclassifiedsHouston,Texas’ Legal MarketplaceAustin& San Antonio800-456-5484, ext. 751•Expert Witness(Statewide)800-456-5484, ext. 706Online Legal Career CenterLocal & National Job Listings • Career Content & Resourcescareer resource - attorneysTEXASLAWYER. COMUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASCORPUS CHRISTI DIVISIONPUBLIC NOTICEREAPPOINTMENT OF INCUMBENT MAGISTRATE JUDGEB. JANICE ELLINGTONThe current term of the office of United States Magistrate JudgeB. Janice Ellington at Corpus Christi, Texas, is due to expire November13, 2012. The United States District Court is required bylaw to establish a panel of citizens to consider the reappointmentof Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington to a new 8 year term.The duties of a Magistrate Judge position includes the following:1. Conducting most preliminary proceedings in criminal cases;2. Trial and disposition of misdemeanor cases;3. Conducting various pretrial matters and evidentiary proceedingson delegation from the judges of the district court; and,4. Trial and disposition of civil cases upon consent of the litigants.B R O W N S V I L L EPUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD*B/P/Q (BID/PROPOSAL/QUALIFICATIONS)INVITATION TOBID/PROPOSENO.PRE-BIDSUBMISSION OPENING NAMECONFERENCEQ 034-12 N/A 06/7/12 5:00 PM 06/8/12 10:30 AM Request for QualificationStatements for SpecialUtility CounselQ 035-12 N/A 06/7/12 5:00 PM 06/8/12 11:00 AM Request for QualificationStatements for LocalLegal CounselSealed bids/proposals/qualifications will be received by the Brownsville Public Utilities Board, at the office of DIANE SOLITAIRE,PURCHASING, 1495 ROBINHOOD DR, BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS 78521, (956) 983-6364. The bids/proposals/qualificationswill be received until the date specified above. INTERESTED BIDDERS/PROPOSERS MAY OBTAIN SPECIFICATIONS AND/OR INFORMATION AT THE BPUB PURCHASING DEPARTMENT. Bidders/Proposers are invited to attend the bid/proposal/qualification opening at the Office of the Purchasing Department on the dates specified. Presence is not mandatory. Specificationsmay also be obtained at http://www.brownsville-pub.com/about/openbids.asp.attorney’s networkTEXASLAWYER. COMtorneyʼs network • expert witnesses & consultants •nd for sale • office space • attorneyʼs network • expertnesses & consultants • land for sale • office space •torneyʼs network • expert witnesses & consultants •nd for sale • office space • attorneyʼs network • expertnesses & consultants • land for sale • office space •torneyʼs network • expert witnesses & consultants •nd for sale Advertise• office space • attorneyʼs HERE network • expertnesses & consultants • land for sale • office space •torneyʼs network • attorneyʼs network • expert witnesconsultants • land for sale • office space • attorneyʼsetwork • expert 214.744.7751witnesses & consultants • land for saleoffice space • attorneyʼs network • expert witnessesconsultants fwilliams@alm.com• land for sale • office space • attorneyʼsetwork • expert witnesses & consultants • land for salefice space • attorneyʼs network • expert witnesses & coltants • land for sale • office space • attorneyʼs netwoexpert witnesses & consultants • land for sale • officeace • attorneyʼs network • attorneyʼs network • expetnesses & consultants • land for sale • office space •torneyʼs network • expert witnesses & consultants •The court invites comments from members of the bar and thepublic as to whether the panel should recommend the reappointmentof Magistrate Judge B. Janice Ellington to the court. Directcomments to: B. Janice Ellington Reappointment Panel; Attention:David J. Bradley, U.S.District Clerk, (under confidential cover),P.O. Box 61010, Houston, Texas 77208.Comments must be received no later than June 15, 2012, 5 p.m.APPEALSmichele barber chimeneAttorney • The Chimene Law FirmAppealsmichelec@airmail.net(713) 885-06689700 Glenfield Ct Ste 626.Houston, Tx 77096Not Certified by the Texas Board of Legal SpecializationSTATE BAR GRIEVANCE COMPLAINTS lawjobs.comlook no further.LEGAL MALPRACTICELEGAL MALPRACTICELAW OFFICES OF ERIC G. OLSEN100 Congress Avenue, Suite 2000Austin, Texas 78701ego@legalmalp.comTel: 512-469-6304 Fax: 877-487-6213(Reviewing cases throughout Texas and Florida)LITIGATION SUPPORT & APPEALSNeed Help With Litigation?Board Certified Civil Trial AttorneyAvailable on Contract or Of-Counsel Basis• Significant First-Chair Experience, Help With Overflow• Litigation Management, Triage, Manage Outside Counsel• Consultation, Depositions, Discovery, MediationSteven M. StrongSteven M. Strong, P.C. s 8226 Douglas Ave, Ste 550Dallas, TX 75225 s Tel 214 890 1100Fax 214 890 9875 s steve@stronglegal.comSTATE BAR LICENSING/GRIEVANCE DEFENSEREACH TEXAS LAWYERSADVERTISE HERECALL 214.744.7751

APRIL 30, 2012 TEXAS LAWYER 27expert witnesses and consultantsTEXASLAWYER. COMBUSINESSENGINEERSINSURANCEFORENSIC ENGINEERSAND CONSULTANTS800-580-3228FORENSIC ENGINEERSProduct FailureProduct LiabilityAccident ReconstructionCourtroom AnimationsCourtroom GraphicsBiomedical AnalysisBiomechanical AnalysisMedical DevicesMedical EquipmentMetallurgical AnalysisRimkusTMConsulting Group, Inc.www.rimkus.comCLASSIFIEDSReach Texas LawyersEMPLOYMENTPUBLIC NOTICESEXPERT WITNESSESATTORNEY’S NETWORKOFFICE SPACECONTACT FORREST WILLIAMS (214) 744-7751or email forrest.williams@incisivemedia.comEmpty Office Space?FILL IT.Advertise here.Call 214.744.7751INSURANCE EXPERTBUS. (512) 244-1779E-MAIL: INSURANCE CONSULTANT &EXPERT WITNESSWayne D. Davidson, J.D., AIC• Commercial Arbitration (Domestic and International)• Former Claim Manager, Supervisor &Licensed Adjuster - All Lines• Insurance Institute of America - Associate• AV Rated Trial Attorney• Complex Insurance Mediation• Claim Procedures, Coverage, Agency E&O,Bad Faith, D.T.P.A. & Insurance CodeWayne D. Davidson & Associates, P.C.7827 Fairdale Lane • Houston, TX 77063(713) 781-5554 • (713) 781-5663 faxwayneddavidson@aol.com • www.LawDavidson.netINSURANCE CONSULTING ASSISTANCE& EXPERT WITNESS TESTIMONYBad Faith • Insurance AgenciesCoverage Questions • Duty to DefendTHOMAS H. VEITCH J.D., CPCU CLU CIC40 Years Industry ExperienceAuthor: “What You Need to Know to Settle with Insurance Companies”745 East Mulberry, Ste. 900 • San Antonio, Texas 78212-3166(210) 736-6600 • Fax (210) 735-6889TEXAS LAWYER CLASSIFIEDSAdvertise HereContact Forrest Williams at 214.744.7751 or fwilliams@alm.com

28 TEXAS lAWYErnamesindexadvertisersindexApril 30, 2012The following index lists all lawyers and law firms mentioned in news stories in this issue. It also lists corporations, governmentor nonprofit agencies, and other bar-related groups that are mentioned in news stories in connection with the work of their staff counsel,officers or members. The page number is the page on which the story begins. Names from Out of Order, special sections, Case Summariesand Discipline are not listed, nor are attorneys featured in Newsmakers.Androvett Legal Media & Marketing .........................................................................................5, 7Encore Trust ..............................................................................................................................13Abbott, Greg ......................................................... 7Anderson Law Firm............................................. 11Anderson, Mark .................................................. 11Bailey & Galyen .................................................. 11Baker Botts ........................................................... 4Ballenger, J. Scott ................................................. 7Ben Abbott P.C. ................................................... 11Black, Robert ........................................................ 4Boerner, Dennis & Franklin ................................. 11Boyce, Maria......................................................... 4Bracewell & Giuliani .............................................. 4Childers, Staton M. ............................................... 5Cockrell, Catherine ............................................. 11Cornyn, John ........................................................ 3Costa, Gregg ......................................................... 3Dallas Bar Association .......................................... 4Dallas Bar Foundation ........................................... 4Dallas City Attorney’s Office ................................ 11De La Garza, Patricia .......................................... 11Demond & Hassan ................................................ 1Demond, William ................................................... 1Doggett, Lloyd ...................................................... 3Donley, Roger ....................................................... 6Ellis & Tidwell ....................................................... 1Essenburg, Julie B. ............................................. 11Evans, Mark .......................................................... 4Fenkel, Mark D. .................................................. 11Fisher, Kevin ......................................................... 4Fletcher, Melinda .................................................. 6Franklin, William A. ............................................. 11Frasher, Mark W. ................................................. 11Garner, Brian D. .................................................. 11Garre, Gregory ...................................................... 7Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher ...................................... 7G. Patrick Collins & Associates ............................ 11Guaderrama, David ............................................... 3Hassan, Meagan ................................................... 1Hays, McConn, Rice & Pickering ........................... 5Herald, Farish & Hughes ..................................... 11Hervey, Barbara .................................................... 6Hittner, David ........................................................ 3Ho, James ............................................................ 7Hodge, Daniel ....................................................... 7Hogan Lovells ....................................................... 7Hunter, Kalinke & Boyd ....................................... 11Jenkins, Young Christian ..................................... 11Jones, Gillaspia & Loyd ......................................... 5Kalinke, Robert P. ................................................ 11Katyal, Neal .......................................................... 7Keller, Sharon ....................................................... 6Get social with ...Kisselburgh, Robert M. ........................................ 11Lafitte, Lucas ...................................................... 11Latham & Watkins ................................................ 7Law Offices of Brian D. Garner............................ 11Lesher, Mark ......................................................... 1Littler .................................................................... 5Locke Lord ........................................................... 4Locke Purnell Boren Laney & Neeley .................... 4Loyd, Bruse .......................................................... 5Mahoney, Maureen ............................................... 7Matheny, Matthew ................................................ 3McCarthy, Osler .................................................... 4MehaffyWeber ...................................................... 4Merica, Jo Ann ...................................................... 4Meyers, Larry ....................................................... 6Mitchell, Jonathan ................................................ 7Nelson, Greg ......................................................... 4Nitzkowski, Greg ................................................... 4Notestine, Kerry .................................................... 5O’Connor, Kathleen ............................................... 5Ohlendorf, Patti ..................................................... 7Paul Hastings ........................................................ 4Piller, Ruth ............................................................ 5Powers, William Jr................................................. 7Provost Umphrey .................................................. 3Rein, Bert ............................................................. 7Robelen, Scott G. ................................................ 11Ross, Mary Bradshaw ......................................... 11Sedgwick .............................................................. 4State Bar of Texas................................................. 4Stettler, Jessica .................................................. 11Stevenson, Frank E. .............................................. 4Texas Office of Court Administration ..................... 4Texas Office of the Attorney General ..................... 7Theofanidis, Paris ................................................. 4Tidwell, R. Wesley ................................................. 1Tredennick, Steven ............................................... 4Umphrey, Walter ................................................... 3University of Michigan Law School ....................... 7University of Virginia School of Law ...................... 4Varnado, Jason ..................................................... 3Vinson & Elkins ..................................................... 4Wiley Rein ............................................................ 7Wise, Robyn M. ................................................... 11Wulfe, Scott .......................................................... 4JAMS .........................................................................................................................................11Magnolia Hotel ..........................................................................................................................25Morgan Stanley Smith Barney....................................................................................................21National Academy of Distinguished Neutrals – Texas Chapter ......................................................6Pye Legal Group ..........................................................................................................................3State Bar of Texas Insurance Trust .............................................................................................12Texas Club ...................................................................................................................................6Wealth Design Group .................................................................................................................24West LegalEdcenter .....................................................................................................................4CalendarTO SPONSOR214.744.7723TO ATTEND214.744.7764www.TexasLawyerEvents.comLaw Tech TexasThursday, May 10 - HoustonRenaissance Hotel8 a.m. to 5 p.m.5.5 CLE HoursIn-House Counsel SummitThursday, May 17- HoustonMagnolia Hotel8 a.m. to 1:15 p.m.3.75 CLE HoursClients, Cases and the Courtroom:Perspectives From Top Trial LawyersWednesday, May 23 - DallasCityplace8 a.m. to 10 a.m.1.5 CLE HoursDomestic Relations: How to Makeyour Case in Family CourtThursday, June 7 - HoustonMaggiano’s Little Italy (Galleria)8 a.m. to 10 a.m.1.5 CLE Hourson FacebookonTexas Lawyer / ALMonline.comon Twitter@TexParteBlog@colleenmcgushin@EditorAMcMillan@jeannegraham@john_council@BrendaSJeffreys@MiriamRozen@AMorrisReportsUpcoming Special SectionsTo advertise: 214.744.7723May 14In-House Texas: Special Reporton Corporate Securities, VentureCapital and M&A with CorporateScorecard -Biggest Deals of 2011May 28Special FOCUS Report:Law Schools and Legal EducationSurvey: Summer associate Hiresat Largest 25 Firms in TexasIssue includesTop Texas Verdicts of 2011

30 TEXAS lAWYErApril 30, 2012OUTof ORDERO p i n i o n • C o m m e n t a r y • H u m o rUnequal Household Chores Hinder Women’s Workplace Successby KATHLEEN J. WUI spend a lot of time talking about what thelegal profession and women lawyers need to doto recruit and retain talented women lawyers(see: just about every other column I’ve written),and I stand by all of that. But keeping women inthe profession is a three-legged table, and I’veall but ignored one of those legs: the men whoare in relationships with these talented womenthat firms are trying so hard to keep.OntheLeveLThat’s a crucially important leg, becausewomen who have unsupportive partners will findit next to impossible to stay in the game, let alonemake it to the top.It’s one thing for a husband to admire hiswife’s talent and enjoy the financial stabilityshe brings to the household. It’s quite anotherto sort, wash and fold piles of laundry, planand cook healthy meals, and make pediatricianappointments. That’s the boring stuff that takesso much time and energy that many women feelthey and their families are better off if they puttheir career on the back burner.Before I go on, I should add that when I say“husband,” I also (for the purposes of this column)mean boyfriends and fiancés. I can’t speakto what I assume is a growing number of households:single-sex partnerships. Does having twowomen, or two men, in a partnership make for amore equal distribution of work? I honestly don’tknow, and I’m sure someone out there is workingon that question. I look forward to reading theirfindings. For the time being, though, I’ll limit mycommentary to heterosexual couples, since theystill make up the majority of coupledom.Among heterosexual couples, according tothe 2008 University of Michigan study titled“Exactly How Much Housework Does a HusbandCreate?” women do an average of 10 hours ofhousework a week before marriage and 17 hoursof housework a week after marriage. Men, on theother hand, do eight hours before marriage andseven hours afterward.So, simply getting married adds seven hoursof housework a week to a woman’s life, butsubtracts an hour of housework a week from aman’s life.Once children enter the picture, the numbersget even worse. The study says married womenwith more than three kids do about 28 hours ofhousework a week, while men logged about 10hours.The good news, according to the study, isthat women are doing less housework today thanthey did in 1976: 26 hours a week in ’76, versus17 hours in 2005. Men, on the other hand, aredoing more. Back in ’76, men did six hours, butthey’re up to 13 hours.Still, it’s clear women do the majority of thehousework and parenting. And that’s one of thebig contributors to the talent drain facing thelegal profession (and all of corporate America, forthat matter). Societycan’t sustain thatdisparity for muchlonger.According to theNALP “Class of 2010National Summary Report,”women make up just underhalf of all law school graduates(although they earn, in general, morecollege degrees than men do, accordingto an April 26, 2011, U.S. Census BureauReport). And when so many women leave theprofession at what should be a dynamic point intheir careers, it’s going to become increasinglyhard to find the talent the legal field needs toserve clients.So what’s the solution? Some families chooseto outsource much of the work to housekeepers,nannies and personal assistants. And if the familyhas the income to support that choice, it’s asolid option.Simply getting marriedadds seven hours ofhousework a weekto a woman’s life, butsubtracts an hour ofhousework a week froma man’s life.But many families have neither the desirenor the finances to employ a staff of householdhelp, so the women in those families have to dosomething they’re usually terrible at: ask forwhat they want.Women are notoriously bad about this in theworkplace, of course. They almost never ask forraises, promotions, more challenging work —you name it. And I suspect most women don’tmiraculously turn into negotiators at 6 p.m.But for more women to reach the upper echelonsof the legal profession (and all the othervocations our illustrious profession feeds intoso well, such as the executive, legislative andjudicial branches of government), women need toask for what they want at home from the peoplewho love them most.And men need to answer that call and stepup. Everybody hates doing dishes and changingdiapers. But for wives to keep bringing home fatpaychecks, particularly after having children,men must raise their games.Another option is for dad to stay home withthe kids while mom pursues her career. Morefamilies have made that choice in recent years,according to a Dec. 5, 2011, U.S. Census BureauReport, which noted that one-third of fatherswith working wives are a regular source of carefor their children. Among those fathers withpreschool-age children, one in five served as theprimary caregiver.Unfortunately, because of the recession,many of those stay-at-home dads may have beenforced to make that choice. With the economyseemingly on a slight rebound, it remains to beseen whether the stay-at-home dad trend willreverse.But single women, or those who don’t havekids yet, are in a perfect position to set the stagewith a loved one (or any potential loved oneswho come along) for a more shared sense ofhousehold responsibility, allowing both in therelationship to achieve in the workplace. It’seasier to set your expectations early than it is tofix an already unequal relationship.When it comes to keeping women in theworkforce, the political is very, very personal.And it’s up to each woman — and the man sheloves — to make equity a reality.Kathleen J. Wu is a partnerin Andrews Kurth in Dallas.Her practice areas includereal estate, finance andbusiness transactions.

April 30, 2012TEXAS lAWYEr 31How to Write a Get-Noticed, Persuasive RésuméPublisherCathy CollinseDiTOr in ChiefColleen Bridget McGushinmanaging eDiTOr Anne K. McMillanDireCTOr Of eleCTrOniC Publishing Joe BordersresearCh eDiTOr Jeanne GrahamseniOr rePOrTers John Council,Brenda Sapino JeffreysrePOrTers Angela Morris, Miriam Rozenby MICHAEL P. MASLANKAAs managing partner of my office, I see lots of résumés. Andmany reflect this fundamental fallacy: A good résumé is onethat communicates information. That is wrong. A good résuméis one that persuades, not informs. Persuasion is what we doas lawyers, whatever our field. The résumé is a new attorney’sfirst shot at showing a prospective employer whether he has theDNA of persuasion. Here are some thoughts on constructing aneffective résumé.arT DireCTOr Thomas PhillipsPrODuCTiOn arTisT/PhOTO eDiTOrFrank GoodenoughDisPlay aDverTising managersKarla Howes, Deni Ruddylaw firm aDverTising managerAnnette L. PlaneyClassifieD sales manager Forrest WilliamsaDverTising COOrDinaTOr Angela McDanielPrOJeCTs manager Anna Liza BurciagaCirCulaTiOn sales rePresenTaTive Joseph NnadiCusTOmer serviCe rePresenTaTive Eva SharmaCOnTrOller Paula L. ZeiterDALLAS MAin Office1412 Main St., 13th Floor, Dallas, 75202(214) 744-9300 • (800) 456-5484Fax: (214) 741-2325Advertising email:druddy@alm.comSubscription/Delivery Issues:(877) ALM-CIRCAUSTin BUReAU(512) 990-5773(512) 524-0368HOUSTOn BUReAU(713) 222-2559TexAS LAwyeR BOOkSeDiTOr Heather D. Nevitt (800) 456-5484bOOk sales rePresenTaTive Wendy ErvinALM SeniOR MAnAGeMenTPresiDenT & CeO Bill CartersvP/Chief legal OffiCer Allison C. HoffmansvP/Chief finanCial OffiCer Eric F. LundbergsvP/infOrmaTiOn & researCh sOluTiOnsKevin H. MichielsensvP/legal meDia Kevin J. VermeulensvP/Chief TeChnOlOgy OffiCer Jeffrey K. WhittlevP/real esTaTe meDia Michael DesiatovP/regiOnal businesses Stephen LincolnvP/eDiTOr in Chief Aric PressgrOuP Publisher/flOriDa, geOrgia, TexasChris MobleyWe always publish corrections at least as prominently as theoriginal mistake was published. If we make a mistake on pageone, we will correct it there.We are eager to make corrections quickly and candidly.Although we welcome letters to the editor that are critical of ourwork, an aggrieved party need not have a letter to the editorpublished for us to correct a mistake. We will publish correctionson our own and in our own voice as soon as we are toldabout them by anyone - our staff, an uninvolved reader, or anaggrieved reader - and can confirm them.Our corrections policy should not be mistaken for a policy ofaccommodating readers who are simply unhappy about a storythat has been published.Any information about corrections or complaints should bedirected to Editor in Chief Colleen Bridget McGushin. Phone(214) 744-7746 or email cmcgushin@alm.com.Reproduction of this publication in whole or in part isprohibited without express written permission of the publisher.©2012. ALM Media Properties, LLC. All rights reserved.theCandidMentOr• No. 1: Use graphics. Let’s say a new attorney’s grades inthe first year of law school put him in that half of the class thatmakes the top half possible. Years two and three were break-outyears, and his GPA increased. The employee-hopeful could listthe three years of law school, with his GPA noted by each year.Snooze. That makes the reader pull out the information. Such atechnique tells, but doesn’t show, and telling is not persuasive.What about using a chart, like one that shows rising stock prices,outperforming from previous years? Instant understanding. Firstrule of persuasion: Show, don’t tell.• No. 2: Generic descriptions get a generic rejection letter. It isgood to have experience as a summer law clerk at a firm or asa judicial or corporate law intern. Good, but not good enough. Isee résumés with generic descriptions a la “drafted pleadings;researched cases; prepared discovery responses.”These tell the reader absolutely nothing. Zip. Zero. Zilch.Instead, the résumé drafter should put this information into aninteresting context: describe the types of cases involved: a roleon the deal team or why the motion in limine was important. Isometimes ask why the résumé writer doesn’t do so, and I hearanswers that I group into the “I’m Not Worthy” category from themovie “Wayne’s World.” Some examples: “I do not want to soundarrogant.” “Why would someone find this of interest?” Want areader to be engaged and interested? Follow the second rule ofpersuasion: Be vivid.People do not hire a piece ofpaper. They hire a breathingperson, with blood pumpingthrough her heart, and fleshhanging from his bones.• No. 3: Schooling v. education. People do not hire a piece ofpaper. They hire a breathing person, with blood pumping throughher heart, and flesh hanging from his bones. Once I met a thirdyearlaw student at my weekend breakfast place to go over herrésumé. It gave a lot of information on her, but nothing about her.When I asked if she ever had a job, she told me about her familybusiness and how she and her sister worked there every summer— not behind some desk, but driving and unloading a deliverytruck in the Texas heat; stuffing flyers into envelopes and, once,taking a crowbar to a warehouse that was being remodeled.She learned a lot about life during those summers. A wellmeaningcounselor told her it wasn’t “professional” to list thistype of work experience. Mark Twain remarked that he never lethis schooling interfere with his education. Prospective employerswant to know about this life “education” that is separate from whatsomeone learned in school. It tells them about the experiencesthat shaped the potential employee as a person. When you aregoing to work every day with a person, you want to know whatthey’re made of. And it’s our “education,” not our schooling, thattells them. Third rule of persuasion: Use flesh and blood stories,not dry and routine facts.• No. 4: Drop the references. Attorneys just starting out shouldkeep their résumés to one page. Period. They should not wastevaluable real estate on a “references” section. It is just emptycalories. Knowing three people is persuasive of nothing. Thereader does not care about a potential hire’s minister or lawschool professor or a judge he knows but never worked for. (Ihave seen all three.) The résumé writer is using the referencesas “proxies” for virtue or intelligence or connections. Fourth ruleof persuasion: Avoid unnecessary filler in favor of truly impactfulinformation (this one comes courtesy of novelist Elmore Leonard,whose secret to success is to go back and cut out the parts of thenovel that he thinks readers will just skip).• No. 5: Contact capital. Dropping useless references leavesroom for a section that belongs on every résumé, but which I neverhave seen. I call it “contact capital,” aka “business development.”Contact capital is developed over time. The employer needsto know what the applicant is doing today to make sure he hasthe capital in the bank tomorrow. It is the web of relationshipsthat generates business, enhances reputation and ensures acareer. This section of the résumé is not formulaic. It is differentfor everyone. The résumé writer should ask questions to figureout what she should include: “Am I on social media, and why?”or “What organizations do I belong to and will I try for a leadershiprole in them?” or “How am I maintaining the relationshipsI now have?”Let’s be clear on what I am not talking about. Chris Baréz-Brown writes in his new book, “Shine: How to Survive and Thriveat Work,” that he hates the interview question “Where do you seeyourself in 10 years?” As he says, “Who has a clue?” Rather, hewrites you should have a “North Star” to guide you, because “it isimportant to know where you’re moving toward: what kind of lifeyou want and what kind of person you want to be. It is the qualityof the vision that is more important than its precision.” Fifth ruleof persuasion: Be different. People remember different.A persuasive résumé is a résumé that evidences a humblemind-set, not an arrogant one. It is about what a prospective hirehopes to learn and what he dreams about becoming. Attorneysshould put these aspirations in their résumés, but only if theycome from their hearts. New lawyers writing résumés shouldthink about a story about being humble from “Inner Excellence:Achieve Extraordinary Business Success Through MentalToughness” by Jim Murphy, the type of book I wish I had read30 years ago. Murphy writes that Navy Seals are the most humbleprofessionals he has ever met. For them, it is not about stormingthrough the door; rather, it is about planning, practice, preparationand respect for the adversary. That’s what makes a Seal. And,come to think of it, that’s what makes the type of lawyer a legalemployer wants to hire.Michael P. Maslanka is the managing partner ofthe Dallas office of Constangy, Brooks & Smith.He is board certified in labor and employment lawby the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. Hispodcasts and “Work Matters” blog can be foundat www.texaslawyer.com. His email address ismmaslanka@constangy.com.

Best Profile:“Overexposed”By Michael GoldhaberBest Single Article:“Civil Inaction”By Jenna GreeneBest News Coverage:“Trials of a General Counsel”By Sue ReisingerBest Single Issue ofa Tabloid/Newsletter:“October 31, 2011”Editorial StaffCongratulations to all recognized ALM Publications,nominated across ten categoriesWith enthusiasm and sincere appreciation, we salute the award-winning writers and editorsof Litigation (supplement of The American Lawyer), The National Law Journal, CorporateCounsel and Texas Lawyer, as well as finalist publications, The American Lawyer andThe Asian Lawyer. Your dedication to creating innovative content and consistent editorialexcellence is unparalleled. Additional congratulations to Aric Press, VP and Editor in Chief atALM, for being recognized with American Business Media’s 44th Crain Award.