Haynes and Boone Lands Role in Closest-Watched Cases of 2017
Confirming its status as a go-to law firm for litigation, Haynes and Boone, LLP is engaged in some of the most closely-watched cases in Texas in 2017.
Law360 has included four civil lawsuits on its Texas “cases to watch” list for 2017, and Haynes and Boone is involved in all four matters— the only law firm to claim this distinction.
Year after year, companies entrust Haynes and Boone to handle mission-critical lawsuits, which is why the firm’s Litigation Department has earned so many accolades. In 2016, Texas Lawyer selected the firm’s Environmental Practice Group as one of its Litigation Departments of the year. Haynes and Boone also ranked in the top 15 percent of all law firms for complex commercial litigation, according to a survey last year of corporate counsel by the highly respected BTI legal research firm. And Chambers USA 2016, Chambers & Partners, noted that the firm’s appellate group is “widely seen as the most accomplished in the state.”
Haynes and Boone’s Litigation Department is on course to enjoy another momentous year in 2017, handling the following cases in which hundreds of millions of dollars and vital legal precedents are at stake.
ETP v. Enterprise Products Partners
Haynes and Boone represents Energy Transfer Partners (ETP) in defending a $535 million judgment in its favor based on a jury determination that ETP was unfairly cut out of a valuable oil pipeline deal by Enterprise Products Partners.
Harman v. Trinity Industries Inc. et al.
The firm represents Trinity in its appeal of a $663 million False Claims Act judgment stemming from a whistleblower’s claim regarding guardrail end terminals that were approved for use by the Federal Highway Administration.
ETC Marketing Ltd. V. Harris County Appraisal District
In a case raising constitutional questions under the Dormant Commerce Clause and state law questions under the Texas Tax Code, the firm represents ETC in its claim that it was unlawfully taxed on natural gas travelling in interstate transit. The case is pending before the Texas Supreme Court, which heard oral argument in December.
D Magazine v. Rosenthal
The firm is defending the magazine against a defamation suit by Janay Rosenthal, who claims a D Magazine article falsely suggested she had committed felony welfare fraud by obtaining food stamp benefits despite living in a million-dollar home.
Haynes and Boone is appealing a Dallas appellate court decision that declined to dismiss the case and relied, in a key part of its ruling, on a Wikipedia definition of “welfare queen.” The appeal, which is pending in the Texas Supreme Court, raises important questions about the proper method for interpreting a media publication and the extent to which courts can rely on non-record sources like Wikipedia when making factual determinations.
To read the Law360 article, click here (subscription required).