Mailing address:
P.O. Box 224626
Dallas, Texas 75222

Physical address:
2223 W. Jefferson Blvd.
Dallas, Texas 75208

214.946.8000 phone
214.946.8433 fax

ldurham@dpslawgroup.com

V-CARD

Resume

Leighton Durham, Partner

= read publication
Publications & Presentations

Common Mistakes Even the Best Lawyers Make

Houston Trial Lawyers Association Lunch CLE (September 10, 2014)

Court’s Charge on Damages Issues

State Bar of Texas CLE, Damages in Civil Litigation 2014 (February 6-7, 2014)

Common Mistakes Even the Best Lawyers Make

Texas Trial Lawyers Association, Dallas Advocates Lunch CLE (06/25/11)

Expanding Mandamus Jurisprudence: Navigating an Increasingly Indefinite Standard of Review

State Bar of Texas, 32nd Annual Advanced Civil Trial Course, San Antonio (July 29-31, 2009)

What Good Is Appellate Counsel?

Vol. 1, Issue 4, Dallas Trial Lawyers Association: The Front Line (March 1, 2005)

= read opinion
Significant Cases

Brazos Contractors Dev., Inc. v. Jefferson, 596 S.W.3d 291 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2019, no pet. h.)

Successfully affirmed $2.15m verdict, with court of appeals upholding jury finding of negligence based on general contractor’s retention of contractual control over subcontractor, even where jury found that general contractor did not retain actual control.  Court of appeals also upheld jury’s “no” answer to the plaintiff’s contributory negligence and past and future medical expenses.

Wright v. Menta, No. 05-15-00272-CV, 2016 WL 3141578 (Tex. App.—Dallas June 6, 2016, pet. denied) (mem. op.)

Affirming arbitration award and rejecting argument that arbitration award should be vacated based on manner in which attorney’s fees records were submitted, and rejecting argument that award regarding interest in patents was unenforceably vague.

Harlingen Med. Ctr. Ltd. P’ship v. Andrade, No. 13-14-0700-CV, No. 13-15-0119-CV, 2016 WL 1613297 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi April 21, 2016, pet. dismissed)

Affirming trial court’s ruling refusing to dismiss medical malpractice case based on the defendants’ challenge to the Chapter 74 expert reports.

Archer v. Tunnell, No. 05-15-00549-CV, 2016 WL 519632 (Tex. App.—Dallas Feb. 9, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.)

Dismissing interlocutory appeal, originating from claim that collision with cow owned by a former doctor was really a health care liability case that required a Chapter 74 expert report, and sanctioning doctor and his attorney for refusing to dismiss frivolous appeal.

RJ Meridian Care of Alice, Ltd. v. Robledo, No. 04-14-00195-CV, 2014 WL 2917669 (Tex. App.–San Antonio, June 19, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.)

Dismissal of interlocutory appeal challenging Chapter 74 expert report for want of jurisdiction in a medical malpractice case.

Borowski v. Ayers, 432 S.W.3d 344 (Tex. App.—Waco 2013, no pet.)

Successfully dismissed interlocutory appeal under CPRC section 51.014(d) where order denying summary judgment did not substantively rule on any controlling legal issue

Kelley & Witherspoon, LLP v. Hooper, 401 S.W.3d 841 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2013, no pet.)

Reversing jury verdict in legal malpractice case against law firm where client failed to present medical-expert testimony in support of damage causation

MBR & Associates, Inc. v. Lile, No. 02-11-00431-CV, 2012 WL 4661665 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Oct. 4, 2012, pet. denied) (mem. op.)

Affirming a judgment for approximately $1 million based on findings of fraud, DTPA violations, and gross negligence, as well as a finding piercing the corporate veil, arising out of a contractor’s failed effort to repair a foundation that ruined a homeowner’s house.

In re Wright, No. 05-12-00370-CV, 2012 WL 1883069 (Tex. App.—Dallas May 23, 2012, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Denial of defendants’ petition for mandamus attempting to have 18 plaintiffs’ cases severed into 18 separate trials.

Capps v. Nexion Health at Southwood, Inc., 349 S.W.3d 849 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2011, no pet.)

Reversing and remanding for a new trial when trial court refused to include the correct corporate entity on the jury form.

Adams v. Staxxring, Inc., 344 S.W.3d 641 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011, pet. denied) 

Denying arbitration due to substantial invocation of the judicial process.

In re Oncor Elec. Delivery Co., No. 05-11-00188-CV, 2011 WL 989071 (Tex. App.—Dallas Mar. 22, 2011, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Denying petition for mandamus concerning trial court’s denial of a motion to designate a responsible third party.

In re Kobelt Mfg. Ltd., No. 07-11-0014-CV, 2011 WL 798199 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Mar. 8, 2011, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Denying petition for mandamus concluding that the parties may agree to alter the statutory deadlines for designating responsible third parties.

Elliott v. Hollingshead, 327 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2010, no pet.)

Reversing trial court’s forfeiture of a plaintiff’s attorney’s fees.

In re Professional Pharmacy II, No. 02-10-163-CV, 2010 WL 3718946 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Sept. 23, 2010, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)

Issued mandamus requiring a jury trial rejecting argument that a signed arbitration provision constituted a jury waiver.

Smith v. Shipp, No. 05-09-01204-CV, 2010 WL 2653733 (Tex. App.—Dallas July 6, 2010, no pet.) (mem. op.)

Reversing a case that had been dismissed for want of prosecution.

In re Deere & Co., 299 S.W.3d 819 (Tex. 2009) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam)

Rejecting John Deere’s argument that a discovery order covering multiple makes and models of equipment was overly broad and unduly burdensome and establishing that a defendant bears the burden of proving the bases for objections raised in discovery.

City of Irving v. Seppy, 301 S.W.3d 435 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, no pet.)

Affirming the denial of a plea to the jurisdiction filed by the City of Irving based on a claim of sovereign immunity.

Reeder v. Trinity Industries, Inc., 294 S.W.3d 851 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, pet. denied)

Reversing a summary judgment and an $829,816 judgment on counterclaims asserted against a plaintiff in a commercial real estate case.

Ferguson v. Building Materials Corp. of Am., 295 S.W.3d 642 (Tex. 2009) 

Reversing a summary judgment granted against a personal injury plaintiff based on the doctrine of judicial estoppel due to an inadvertent omission in a bankruptcy filing.

Pinnacle Anesthesia Consultants, P.A. v. Fisher, 309 S.W.3d 93 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, pet. denied).

Affirming an $8.5 million judgment in favor of a physician who was wrongfully terminated from his practice group.

In the Matter of B.B.M., 291 S.W.3d 463 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, pet. denied) 

Reversing a jury verdict in which a jury had awarded managing conservatorship of a child to a non-parent couple instead of to the natural father.

UHS of Timberlawn, Inc. v. S.B., a Minor, 281 S.W.3d 207 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, pet. denied)

Affirming denial of a motion to dismiss based on a challenge to an expert report in a medical malpractice case.

Benish v. Grottie,  281 S.W.3d 184 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2009, pet. denied)

Affirming denial of motion to dismiss based on challenge to an expert report in a medical malpractice case. Also holding that an expert need not opine as to willful and wanton negligence in a chapter 74 report despite argument that case is governed by the Emergency Room statute.

Boulle v. Boulle, 254 S.W.3d 701 (Tex. App.–Dallas 2008, pet. denied)

Successfully protected a judgment rendered after a jury trial in a complicated commercial suit involving more than $250 million in alleged damages.

Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee v. American Home Assurance Co., 261 S.W.3d 24 (Tex. 2008)

Amicus brief

McAteer v. Silverleaf Resorts Inc., 514 F.3d 411 (5th Cir. 2008)

Amicus brief

Lanphier v. Avis, 244 S.W.3d 596 (Tex.  App.—Texarkana 2008, pet. dism’d by agr.)

Affirming a trial court’s denial of a defendant’s motion to dismiss in a medical malpractice case.

Akins v. Radiator Specialty Co., No. Civ. A 3:05-451, 2006 WL 2850444 (W.D. Pa. Sept. 29, 2006)

Granting the Plaintiff’s motion for remand in a toxic tort Benzene exposure case based on a lack of complete federal preemption.

Mireles v. Ashley, 201 S.W.3d 779 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2006, no pet.)

Reversing and remanding the trial court’s granting of a no evidence summary judgment in a negligent hiring case. 

Audino v. Raytheon Co. Short Term Disability Plan, 129 Fed. App’x 882 (5th Cir. 2005)

Obtained reversal of a summary judgment granted against a plaintiff in an ERISA benefits dispute action.

Carroll v. Bank of New York, No. 10-03-00319-CV, 2005 WL 241224 (Tex. App.—Waco Feb. 2, 2005, no pet.)

Appeal of a forcible entry and detainer action.

Hoffman-LaRoche, Inc. v. Kwasnik, 109 S.W.3d 21 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2003, orig. proceeding)

Successfully defended a trial court’s order denying Hoffman-LaRoche, Inc.’s special appearance.

Scroll to Top