IN THE DISTRICT COURT. Lawsuit without discovery and with the burden on the plaintiff was too draconian.With The Carlson Law Firm doing the firm's litigation and trial work. The employer was subsequently ordered to pay worker's compensation disability benefits. The law on attorneys' fees, and how litigators can plan for and effectuate an attorneys' fee claim. Master Consolidated Discovery Requests (? CDRs?) to Plaintiffs . Conducted or even requested in the nearly six years since the order was signed. The Court bases its conclusion on three cases. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR TEXAS. In Dallas County v. Smith, 2013 TX 1, the Court held the “duty to disclose discovery” exception to the attorney-client privilege was not applicable and thus no discovery order was required in that case. In Smith v. Smith, 857 S.W.2d 467 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1993), it was held that Dallas County could not recover for lost fees if the court did its own discovery. In Austin Property Corporation v. Tarrant County, 805 S.W.2d 474 (Tex. App.—Austin 1990), it was held that the court was not required to appoint an attorney to find and serve process on the applicant. INGERSOLL & COMPANY, INC., v. MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., L.P., and AFFILIATES, 804 S.W.2d 1196 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1989, writ denied). While the majority opined that the trial court and the plaintiff were not required to appoint an attorney, the trial court in such cases are not obligated to determine whether the attorney is a suitable choice until after it renders its decision.
Disclaimer
The materials in this section are taken from public sources. We disclaim all representations or any warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, authenticity, reliability, accessibility, adequacy, or completeness of any data in this paragraph. Nevertheless, we make every effort to cite public sources deemed reliable and trustworthy.