Brigham Exploration Company, Ben M. Brigham, David T. Brigham, Harold D. Carter, Stephen P. Reynolds, Stephen C. Hurley, Hobart A. Smith, Scott W. Tinker, Statoil ASA and Fargo Acquisition, Inc. v. Raymond Boytim, Hugh Duncan, Robert Fioravanta, Walter Schwimmer, Michael Ohler, Ryan Ohler, Walter Ohler, Jr., the Edward J. Goodman Life Income Trust and the Edward J. Goodman Generation Skipping Trust, Jeffrey Whalen, and Howard Weisberg, Individually

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided November 20, 2015·No. 03-15-00248-CV·Published

Opinion

ACCEPTED

03-15-00248-CV

7922603

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

11/20/2015 11:03:34 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

No. 03-15-000248-CV

IN THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS FILED IN THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

11/20/2015 11:03:34 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

BRIGHAM EXPLORATION COMPANY, BEN M. BRIGHAM, Clerk

DAVID T. BRIGHAM, HAROLD D. CARTER, STEPHEN C. HURLEY, STEPHEN P. REYNOLDS, HOBART A. SMITH, SCOTT W. TINKER, STATOIL ASA, AND FARGO ACQUISITION, INC.,

Appellants,

vs.

RAYMOND BOYTIM, et al., INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED,

Appellees.

Appeal from the 261st Judicial District Court of Travis County, Texas Trial Court No. D-1-GN-11-003205 The Honorable Lora Livingston, Presiding

APPELLEES’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OVERLENGTH SINGLE ANSWERING BRIEF RESPONDING TO TWO OPENING BRIEFS

MICHAEL D. MARIN State Bar No. 00791174 BOULETTE GOLDEN & MARIN L.L.P. 2801 Via Fortuna Drive, Suite 530 Austin, TX 78746 Telephone: 512/732-8900 512/732-8905 (fax) mmarin@boulettegolden.com Liaison Counsel

RANDALL J. BARON SAMUEL H. RUDMAN DAVID T. WISSBROECKER MARK S. REICH STEVEN M. JODLOWSKI MICHAEL G. CAPECI ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP & DOWD LLP 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 58 South Service Road, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92101 Melville, NY 11747 Telephone: 619/231-1058 Telephone: 631/367-7100 619/231-7423 (fax) 631/367-1173 (fax)

Class Counsel for Appellees KENDALL LAW GROUP, LLP THE BRISCOE LAW FIRM, PLLC JOE KENDALL WILLIE C. BRISCOE DANIEL HILL 8150 N. Central Expressway, Suite 1575 JAMIE J. McKEY Dallas, TX 75206 3232 McKinney Avenue, Suite Telephone: 214/239-4568 700 281/254-7789 (fax) Dallas, TX 75204 Telephone: 214/744-3000 214/744-3015 (fax)

DUNNAM & DUNNAM LLP BRODSKY & SMITH, LLC HAMILTON LINDLEY EVAN J. SMITH 4125 West Waco Drive (76710) MARC ACKERMAN P.O. Box 8418 Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602 Waco, TX 76714-8418 Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 Telephone: 254/753-6437 Telephone: 610/667-6200 254/753-7434 (fax) 610/667-9029 (fax)

LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP KOHN, SWIFT & GRAF, P.C. SHANE T. ROWLEY DENIS F. SHEILS 30 Broad Street, 24th Floor One South Broad Street, Suite 2100 New York, NY 10004 Philadelphia, PA 19107-3389 Telephone: 212/363-7500 Telephone: 215/238-1700 866/367-6510 (fax) 215/238-1968 (fax)

THE WEISER LAW FIRM, P.C. RYAN & MANISKAS, LLP PATRICIA C. WEISER KATHARINE M. RYAN JAMES M. FICARO RICHARD A. MANISKAS 22 Cassatt Avenue 995 Old Eagle School Road, Suite 311 Berwyn, PA 19312 Wayne, PA 19087 Telephone: 610/225-2677 Telephone: 484/588-5516 610/408-8062 (fax) 484/450-2582 (fax)

KELLY N. REDDELL THE REDDELL FIRM PLLC 100 Highland Park Village, Suite 200 Dallas, Texas 75205 Telephone: 214/295-3031 Additional Counsel for Appellees

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

Pursuant to Rule 9.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure,

Appellees in the above-entitled and numbered cause respectfully request leave

to exceed the 15,000-word limit for their Answering Brief. Appellees request

leave to file the accompanying 17,753-word Answering Brief.

1. “A court may, on motion, permit a document that exceeds the

prescribed limit.” Tex. R. App. P. 9.4(i)(4). This request is sought on the

following grounds.

2. First, Appellees must respond to two separate opening briefs: one

filed by the Brigham Appellants and one filed by the Statoil Appellants.

Collectively, these briefs are 73 pages in length and contain 17,464 words of

argument.

3. While there is some overlap in Appellants’ opening briefs, each

brief focuses on different findings by the trial court in connection with class

certification. The Brigham Defendants focus on the class definition, the trial

plan’s treatment of plaintiffs’ breach of fiduciary duty claims and defendants’

defenses, and the trial court’s findings regarding the class certification

requirements under Tex. R. Civ. P. 42. The Statoil Defendants focus on the

trial court’s findings regarding the adequacy of the named plaintiffs as to Statoil

and the trial plan’s treatment of plaintiffs’ aiding and abetting a breach of

fiduciary duty claim against Statoil. Effectively countering the numerous

arguments made by each group of Appellants requires more space than is

typically permitted in an Answering Brief.

4. Second, this appeal rests on a voluminous record that comprises a

five-volume clerk’s record and a four-volume reporter’s record. The record

runs more than 4,500 pages, reflecting three years’ worth of class certification

proceedings.

5. To respond to the appeal, that record must be discussed in detail,

because Appellants’ challenges to the trial court’s class certification order relate

to numerous factual findings by the trial court. For instance, Appellants

challenge the trial court’s findings that seven named plaintiffs are adequate

class representatives. In determining whether a court’s adequacy findings are

supported by the record, it is necessary to discuss the record as to each of the

plaintiffs – a lengthy task given the record here. See Farmers Ins. Exch. v.

Leonard, 125 S.W.3d 55, 66 (Tex. App.-Austin 2003, pet. denied).

6. Third, choice-of-law principles require this Court to apply an

unfamiliar body of law. Because Brigham Exploration Co. was incorporated in

Delaware, plaintiffs’ claims (and defendants’ defenses) are governed by

Delaware substantive law. Additional pages are necessary to explain the law

supporting the trial court’s decision.

7. Fourth, Appellees’ counsel have worked diligently to limit the

length of their Answering Brief. Although Appellees are seven separate

parties, they have consolidated their arguments in response to Appellants into a

single Answering Brief. Also, where Appellants’ arguments overlap, Appellees

avoid duplication by only making their counter-arguments once.1

8. Counsel for Appellees conferred with counsel for Appellants

before filing this request. Appellants do not oppose the relief requested.

9. Based on the foregoing, Appellees respectfully request leave to file

the accompanying 17,753‑word Answering Brief. Appellees submit that a

modest increase in the word count for their Answering Brief is appropriate in

this situation.

DATED: November 20, 2015 Respectfully submitted, BOULETTE GOLDEN & MARIN L.L.P. MICHAEL D. MARIN Texas Bar #00791174

/s/ Michael D. Marin MICHAEL D. MARIN

2801 Via Fortuna Drive, Suite 530 Austin, TX 78746 Telephone: 512/732-8900 512/732-8905 (fax) Liaison Counsel

1 Appellees have considerably shortened their Answering Brief. While the two briefs Appellees initially filed totaled 21,803 words, the single, omnibus brief accompanying this request contains 17,753 words.

ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP SAMUEL H. RUDMAN MARK S. REICH MICHAEL G. CAPECI 58 South Service Road, Suite 200 Melville, NY 11747 Telephone: 631/367-7100 631/367-1173 (fax) ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP RANDALL J. BARON DAVID T. WISSBROECKER STEVEN M. JODLOWSKI 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 619/231-1058 619/231-7423 (fax) Class Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellees KENDALL LAW GROUP, LLP JOE KENDALL DANIEL HILL JAMIE J. McKEY 3232 McKinney Avenue, Suite 700 Dallas, TX 75204 Telephone: 214/744-3000 214/744-3015 (fax) THE BRISCOE LAW FIRM, PLLC WILLIE C. BRISCOE 8150 N. Central Expressway, Suite 1575 Dallas, TX 75206 Telephone: 214/239-4568 281/254-7789 (fax) DUNNAM & DUNNAM LLP HAMILTON LINDLEY 4125 West Waco Drive (76710) P.O. Box 8418 Waco, TX 76714-8418 Telephone: 254/753-6437 254/753-7434 (fax)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI