Chad and Alyka Hanchey v. Lois S. Cantu
Cause No. CV-16-0000163 in the 198th District Court of Bandera County, Texas
Affirmed, Cantu v. Hanchey, No. 04-18-00697-CV; in the Fourth Court of Appeals, San Antonio, Texas

The Firm successfully represented the Hancheys against Ms. Cantu, the person who sold them a house infested with wood devouring insects. The trial court found breach of contract, violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and fraud against Cantu. Cantu appealed and the court of appeals affirmed. (Memorandum opinion: Cantu v. Hanchey, 2019 Tex. App. Lexis 6539 (Tex. App – San Antonio, July 31, 2019))

Norma Perales v. Roel Lara and Alfonso Santos Obregon, Jr.
Cause No. 2013-CCV-61072-4 in the County Court at Law No. 4, Nueces County, Texas.
Affirmed, Perales v. Lara, No. 13-16-00285-CV; in the 13th Court of Appeals, Corpus Christi, Texas

Ms. Perales took advantage of an early retirement buyout offered by her employer, Robstown Independent School District. She later asked to be re-hired despite her previous, voluntary retirement and when she was denied, she sued the school district superintendent and assistant superintendent for fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The trial court granted the Firm’s request that the case be dismissed, and she appealed. The court of appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court. (Memorandum opinion: Perales v. Lara, 2018 Tex. App. Lexis 301 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi 2018, pet denied) Ms. Perales then appealed to the Texas Supreme Court who declined to consider her appeal.

Jamie Chasen v. Tesoro Corp. and Tri-Starr Personnel, LLC
Cause No: 2014-CI-09713 in the 288th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Ms. Chasen was a temporary employee working through Tri-Starr Personnel. Her temporary employer decided they no longer needed Chasen’s services but did not tell her until about a month later. Chasen decided to sue for religious discrimination based upon comments made on the day of her release from work by a co-worker. The Firm received a unanimous jury verdict in favor of Tri-Starr 20 minutes after the jury started deliberating.

Villegas v. Del Mar College
Cause No. 09-6442-F in the 214th District Court; Nueces County, Texas
Affirmed, Villegas v. Del Mar College, No. 13-10-00379-CV; in the 13th Court of Appeals, Corpus Christi, Texas

Mr. Villegas was an adjunct professor with Del Mar College for 10 years. He applied but was not selected for a permanent teaching position with the College, so he sued, claiming race discrimination. The Firm asked the trial to dismiss, which it did, and he appealed. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court decision, and the Texas Supreme Court refused to consider his subsequent appeal. (Memorandum opinion: Villegas v. Del Mar College, 2011 Tex. App. Lexis 9598 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi December 8, 2011, pet denied)).

Velma S. Villalon v. Del Mar College District a/k/a Del Mar College 
Civil Action No. 4:09-CV-2934 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas – Corpus Christi Division, and
Velma S. Villalon v. Del Mar College District a/k/a Del Mar College
Cause No. 09-4459-A in the 28th Judicial District Court, Nueces County, Texas

In her federal court case, Ms. Villalon claimed violation of the ADA and that she was terminated in retaliation for having taken leave pursuant to the FMLA. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Del Mar College. 

In her state case, Villalon alleged violations of Chapter 21 of the Texas Labor Code, asserting she was terminated for having complained of sexual harassment and national origin discrimination. The trial court rendered summary judgment in favor of Del Mar College.

Lindsay vs. City of Beeville, et. al.
Civil Action No. 2:07-cv-00068 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas – Corpus Christi Division
Affirmed, Cause No. 08-40202; Lindsay vs. City of Beeville, et. al.; in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Mr. Lindsay was temporarily detained by a Beeville police officer upon suspicion of passing counterfeit money. He was subsequently released. Lindsay sued in federal court, asserting claims of violation of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights for alleged false arrest and improper seizure. The trial court granted the Firm’s motion to dismiss and Lindsay appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals where the dismissal was affirmed. (Opinion: Lindsay v. City of Beeville, 288 Fed. App’x. 982 (5th Cir. 2008)).

Sarah Monteith v. Derek Dreitzler and Guadalupe County
Cause No. 12-0816-CV in the 25th District Court; Guadalupe County, Texas

Ms. Monteith was rear-ended by another driver. She claimed a Guadalupe County Sheriff’s Deputy caused the accident when he entered the roadway just in front of her on his way to an accident and she had to stop suddenly. The trial court dismissed her case on a plea to the jurisdiction based upon the “emergency exception” of §101.055(2) of the Texas Tort Claims Act.

In Re Coastal Bend College
Cause No. 07-04-45797 in the 79th District Court; Jim Wells County, Texas
Affirmed, In Re Coastal Bend College, No. 04-07-00660; In the Fourth Court of Appeals, San Antonio, Texas 

Several employees of Coastal Bend College were involved in the improper removal and attempted dissemination of highly private and protected personnel records from the College’s HR department. The employees claimed the information constituted “court records” that were therefore, public under the Texas Public Information Act. The firm filed suit in state district court requesting an order sealing the records and requiring all copies of them be returned to the College, which the court granted. The employees appealed, but the trial court’s decision was affirmed by the 4th Court of Appeals, San Antonio, Texas. Published opinion at In Re Coastal Bend College, 276 S.W.3d 83 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2008, no pet.).

​In Re: Munoz
Cause No. 05-01-43087-CV in the 79th District Court, Jim Wells County, Texas
Affirmed, In Re: Munoz; No. 4-05-00236-CV; In the Fourth Court of Appeals, San Antonio, Texas

Mr. Munoz wan an inmate in the Jim Wells County Jail. He was injured by a jailer after he was perceived to be aggressive. Mr. Munoz sued Jim Wells County and several of its employees for violation of Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, and for personal injuries under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. The firm filed motions to dismiss on behalf of both the County and the individual employees which were granted by the trial court. Munoz appealed but the trial court’s decision was affirmed by the 4th Court of Appeals, San Antonio, Texas. (Memorandum opinion: In Re: Munoz, 2006 Tex. App Lexis 5069 (Tex. App. – San Antonio, June 14, 2006)).

Oscar Arismendez v. City of Beeville
Cause No. B-03-1042-CV-B in the 156th Judicial District of Bee County, Texas

Mr. Arismendez was a police officer with the City of Beeville, Texas. He was terminated for poor performance/attitude very shortly after he complained to the Beeville City Council about what he said were violations of the law by the Department. Arismendez filed suit against the City of Beeville, claiming violations of the Texas Whistleblower Act. The jury returned a unanimous verdict in favor of the City.

Jesus Alejandro v. Robstown Independent School District, et al
Cause No. 01-4459-A in the 117th District Court, Nueces County, Texas
Affirmed, Jesus Alejandro v. Robstown Independent School District, et al; No. 13-01-00780-CV; In the Thirteenth Court of Appeals, Corpus Christi, Texas

Mr. Alejandro was terminated from his position as superintendent of the Robstown Independent School District, and he sued the District and several board members claiming he suffered a retaliatory discharge in violation of the Texas Whistleblowers’ Act. During trial, the court granted the Firm’s request for directed verdict dismissing Alejandro’s claims, and Alejandro appealed. In a published opinion, the 13th Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s directed verdict. See Alejandro v. Robstown ISD, 131 S.W. 3d 663 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi 2004, no pet.)

Joan Hughes vs. Central Texas College
Civil Action No. A02CA 314 JN; In the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas; Austin Division

Ms. Hughes asked for an employment application from the HR Department of Central Texas College. An employee in that department referred Hughes to a stack of form applications on the counter and went about her other business. Ms. Hughes described the employee’s attitude as “nasty and mean” and sued for race discrimination under Title VII. During trial, the court granted the Firm’s request for directed verdict dismissing Hughes’ claims as having no basis in fact.

Antonio J. Gutierrez v. Laredo Independent School District
Cause No. 2002-CVQ-0858-D3 in the 341st District Court; Webb County, Texas
Affirmed, Antonio J. Gutierrez v. Laredo Independent School District; No. 04-03-00353-CV; In the Fourth Court of Appeals, San Antonio, Texas

Mr. Gutierrez, an employee of LISD, was told by the school board that it intended to reclassify his position. After Mr. Gutierrez signed the requisite paperwork associated with the new job, he was informed that the new salary for the job was substantially less than the salary he was making. He filed suit alleging breach of contract and equitable estoppel and sought declaratory relief. The trial court granted the Firm’s motion to dismiss the case because Mr. Gutierrez had not exhausted his administrative remedies with the Texas Education Commission before filing suit. In a published opinion, the 4th Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of Gutierrez’ case. See Gutierrez v. Laredo Independent School District; 139 S.W.3d 363 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2004, no pet.).