Ward v. Hawkins
Dallas Court of Appeals, No. 05-12-00712-CV (December 16, 2013)
Justices Fillmore (Opinion), Myers, and Lewis
Dallas Court of Appeals, No. 05-12-00712-CV (December 16, 2013)
Justices Fillmore (Opinion), Myers, and Lewis
After obtaining a default judgment in Kansas against his former lawyer, the plaintiff brought suit in Texas to enforce the judgment. Contending the Kansas court lacked personal jurisdiction over him and his firm, the lawyer filed a motion in the Texas trial court to vacate the Kansas judgment. The Texas trial court overruled the motion by operation of law. The Court of Appeals noted that the plaintiff’s Kansas pleading stated numerous jurisdictional allegations against the lawyer, all of which were deemed admitted because of the default. The Court found particularly significant the plaintiff’s allegations that the lawyer had advised and negotiated on behalf of the plaintiff in connection with a separate Kansas lawsuit, had drafted a response to that lawsuit, and had requested and been granted a continuance in that lawsuit. The lawyer’s alleged liability to the client arose from his representation in that lawsuit; so these facts supported specific jurisdiction. The Court concluded the lawyer failed to carry his burden to show by clear and convincing evidence that the Kansas court lacked jurisdiction, finding insufficient the lawyer’s testimony that he had never been to Kansas, did not own property in Kansas, did not maintain a bank account in Kansas, and did not have an office in Kansas. The Court of Appeals therefore affirmed the trial court’s denial of the lawyer’s motion to vacate the Kansas judgment.
