• Insurance Defense, Coverage, and Bad-Faith Litigation
  • Complex Business Litigation

Many clients choose Eggleston + Briscoe to handle appeals of trial results, if necessary. Our attorneys write briefs, present oral arguments, submit cases to appellate courts, and have prevailed in a number of appeals. Several of our partners have admission to the United States Supreme Court and/or United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and many of our attorneys have admission to all Texas appellate courts.

In 2012, partner Bill Eggleston and associate John Michael Raborn successfully handled the appeal of a favorable jury verdict to the Texas Supreme Court based on the “resign-to-run rule” of the Texas Constitution. The plaintiff there had sued his local county judge and county commissioners for improper removal from office. After Eggleston + Briscoe prevailed at trial, the plaintiff appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed a petition for review in the Supreme Court of Texas, and Bill Eggleston and John Michael Raborn again prevailed as the Supreme Court of Texas denied the plaintiff’s petition for review after reviewing the briefing provided by Eggleston + Briscoe.

Case Results

Judgment affirmed.
Final summary judgment obtained for our client at the trial-court level was affirmed on appeal after E+B submitted its brief to the appellate court.
Supreme Court of Texas denies opponent’s petition for review.
E+B successfully defended an appeal of a jury verdict in favor of its client. The plaintiff sued our clients, the local county judge and county commissioners, for improper removal from office. The jury determined that removal was appropriate pursuant to the Texas Constitution’s “resign-to-run rule,” because the plaintiff had announced his candidacy for another elected position in the county. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court. The plaintiff then filed a petition for review in the Supreme Court of Texas. E+B submitted a brief, and the Court denied plaintiff’s petition for review.