September 2007

In 2004, Japan’s NHK network televised Satoyama, a beautiful documentary about the community and environment surrounding Japan’s largest lake, Lake Biwa. Watch Part 1:

See also parts 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.

We received the jury verdict after our nearly month-long trial earlier this week, and unfortunately, the jury went against us. We were disappointed, needless to say, especially because we had been optimistic about the result. I hate to be too cynical, but an important lesson I learned is this: South Texas is South Texas.

For those of you that aren’t lawyers, at least not here in Texas, you may not know that state court in South Texas, and especially the Rio Grande Valley, is reputed to be an extremely plaintiff-friendly environment. Juries routinely award large verdicts on thin proof, and the appellate courts see a constant stream of appeals from the trial courts down South. Many of those large verdicts come in personal injury cases, like refinery explosions or medical malpractice cases.

We thought our case was different; it was a business case, not a personal injury case. It involved a group of local businessmen that wanted to partner with a national company to form and operate a local facility. They negotiated with several large companies, including our client. The negotiations with our client fell through, and the businessmen ultimately moved on and formed a very successful relationship with another company. Nonetheless, the businessmen sued our client for fraud and tortious interference. It turns out that for the jury, at least, the case wasn’t so different—small local plaintiffs versus a large out-of-state corporation. The end. The jury, without much consideration given to the evidence we presented, awarded plaintiffs exactly the damages they sought.

We were convincing enough to one of the jurors, though, to avoid punitive damages. Although she did join the jury verdict on fraud liability, she would have awarded only minimal damages and refused to agree to punitive damages—a decision that has to be made by a unanimous jury. So, despite our disappointment, the verdict was much less than it might have been.

The upside, at least on a personal and professional level, is that now I get to work on an interesting and meritorious appeal. Despite our optimism about the case we worked diligently to preserve error, and now we get to see that effort bear some fruit.