2008-07-11 Texas Supreme Court Opinions

EMPLOYMENT LAW: Whistleblower Act vs. State Anti-Discrimination Act (TCHRA), Anti-Discrimination Act as Exclusive Remedy.
OPEN-ENDED ATTORNEY FEE CONTRACT ENFORCED: Parol Evidence Rule bars evidence that fees were capped.
DEFAULT JUDGMENT VACATED: Defendant was not given proper notice that her answer would be stricken; nor an opportunity to correct the problem.

City of Waco, Texas v. Lopez (Tex. 2008),
No. 06-0089 (Tex. July 11, 2008) (Opinion by Justice Wainwright) (Whistleblower Act, TCHRA, discrimination, exclusive remedy, failure to satisfy prerequisites for suit by not filing with agency first) (retaliatory discharge complaint should have been pursued under Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (CHRA), rather than under the general Whistleblower Act.
CITY OF WACO, TEXAS v. ROBERT LOPEZ; from Limestone County; 10th district (10-04-00085-CV, 183 SW3d 825, 12-14-05) The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and dismisses the case. Justice Wainwright delivered the opinion of the Court.

David J. Sacks, PC v. McIntre Haden (Tex. 2008),
No. 07-0472 (Tex. July 11, 2008) (per curiam) (attorney's fee collection suit, hourly attorney fee contract enforced, parol evidence rule held to bar introduction of evidence that flat fee had been agreed to or that total fees were capped where written agreement did not say so)
DAVID J. SACKS, P.C. D/B/A SACKS & ASSOCIATES v. CHARLES MCINTYRE HADEN, JR., INDIVIDUALLY, AND CHARLES MCINTYRE HADEN, JR. & COMPANY D/B/A HADEN & COMPANY; from Harris County; 1st district (01-01-00200-CV, 222 SW3d 580, 03-08-07)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and reinstates the trial court's judgment. Per Curiam Opinion

Sacks v. Haden, (Tex. 2008) (companion case involving appeal from turnover order based on judgment for attorney's fees that was not superseded)
No. 07-0487 (Tex. July 11, 2008)(per curiam) (turnover order to enforce judgment in fee collection case) DAVID J. SACKS, P.C. D/B/A SACKS & ASSOCIATES v. CHARLES MCINTYRE HADEN, JR., INDIVIDUALLY, AND CHARLES MCINTYRE HADEN, JR. & COMPANY D/B/A HADEN & COMPANY; from Harris County; 1st district (01-03-00025-CV, 222 SW3d 580, 03-08-07) unopposed motion to consolidate dismissed as mootPursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to that court. Per Curiam Opinion

Sells v. Drott, No. 07-0848 (Tex. 2008) (per curiam)
(default judgment set aside on lack of notice grounds; defendant not given proper notice of hearing at which defendant's pleadings were stricken)
LAVERNA SELLS v. EARL DROTT; from Smith County; 12th district (12-07-00020-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 07-18-07) Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment, vacates the trial court judgment, and remands the case to the trial court. Per Curiam Opinion