Infotek Consulting, LLC v. Dunn
Dallas Court of Appeals, No. 05-26-00028-CV (October 5, 2026)
Justices Miskel, Breedlove, and Jackson (Opinion linked here)
Ken Carroll
The venerable request “for such further relief to which this Defendant may show itself to be entitled.” We’ve all included it at the end of a pleading or motion. Still do. Do we really think it matters? In this personal jurisdiction case, it could have—but not in a good way.
Dunn sued Lombardi for striking him with her car. He then amended to add Lombardi’s employer, Infotek. Dunn alleged Infotek was liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior because Lombardi was acting “within the scope and course of her employment” when she struck him.
Infotek responded with a special appearance, contesting personal jurisdiction. It supported its special appearance with sworn testimony establishing its lack of contacts with Texas and refuting Dunn’s allegation that Lombardi—a remote employee—was on the job when the accident occurred. (She was on her way to meet a friend at a coffee shop after finishing work for the day.)Dunn replied, however, that “Infotek waived its jurisdictional challenge by requesting ‘such further relief’ to which it may show itself to be entitled in the prayer section of its special appearance.” Oops? The Court of Appeals noted that, “A party enters a general appearance and waives a special appearance by (1) invoking the jurisdiction of the court on any question other than the court’s jurisdiction, … or (3) seeking affirmative action from the court.” Although the boilerplate request in Infotek’s prayer sounds like it could fit these criteria, the appeals court denied Dunn’s waiver claim. It ruled that, “Because the request for ‘further relief’ was made solely in conjunction with Infotek’s special appearance, Infotek did not make a request for relief that was
inconsistent with its assertion that the trial court lacked jurisdiction.”
Clearly the right result. But did the request “for such further relief to which this Defendant may show itself to be entitled” serve any useful purpose? Was it worth the heartburn? It’s always a good idea to pause and think before you boilerplate.
