Thomas A. Dardas, Individually and D/B/A Dardas & Associates and Bill Ogletree, P.C., A/K/A Ogletree Law Firm v. Fleming, Hovenkamp & Grayson, P.C., Fleming Law Firm, PLLC, and Fleming & Associates, L.L.P

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 27, 2006
Docket14-03-00538-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Thomas A. Dardas, Individually and D/B/A Dardas & Associates and Bill Ogletree, P.C., A/K/A Ogletree Law Firm v. Fleming, Hovenkamp & Grayson, P.C., Fleming Law Firm, PLLC, and Fleming & Associates, L.L.P (Thomas A. Dardas, Individually and D/B/A Dardas & Associates and Bill Ogletree, P.C., A/K/A Ogletree Law Firm v. Fleming, Hovenkamp & Grayson, P.C., Fleming Law Firm, PLLC, and Fleming & Associates, L.L.P) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Thomas A. Dardas, Individually and D/B/A Dardas & Associates and Bill Ogletree, P.C., A/K/A Ogletree Law Firm v. Fleming, Hovenkamp & Grayson, P.C., Fleming Law Firm, PLLC, and Fleming & Associates, L.L.P, (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

Further Motion for Rehearing Overruled; Affirmed in Part, Reversed and Remanded in Part; Memorandum Opinion of August 18, 2005 Withdrawn and Majority and Dissenting Opinions on Rehearing filed April 27, 2006

Further Motion for Rehearing Overruled; Affirmed in Part, Reversed and Remanded in Part; Memorandum Opinion of August 18, 2005 Withdrawn and Majority and Dissenting Opinions on Rehearing filed April 27, 2006.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-03-00538-CV

THOMAS A. DARDAS, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A DARDAS & ASSOCIATES AND BILL OGLETREE, P.C. A/K/A OGLETREE LAW FIRM, Appellants

V.

FLEMING, HOVENKAMP & GRAYSON, P.C., FLEMING LAW FIRM, PLLC, AND FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, L.L.P., Appellees

On Appeal from the 61st District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 02-19156

D I S S E N T I N G  O P I N I O N   O N   R E H E A R I N G


Upon careful consideration, I conclude that the February 1998 contract  unambiguously applies only to cases in which the clients were referred by Dardas or Ogletree or in which Dardas and Ogletree performed work.  Therefore, the trial court correctly granted summary judgment as to all claims.  I would grant rehearing and affirm the trial court=s judgment.  Accordingly, I respectfully dissent. 

/s/     Joe L. Draughn

         Senior Justice

Judgment rendered, Memorandum Opinion of August 18, 2005 Withdrawn, and Substitute Majority Opinion and Dissenting Opinion on Rehearing filed April 27, 2006.

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Guzman, and Draughn.[1]  (Frost, J., majority).



[1]  Senior Justice Joe L. Draughn sitting by assignment.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Thomas A. Dardas, Individually and D/B/A Dardas & Associates and Bill Ogletree, P.C., A/K/A Ogletree Law Firm v. Fleming, Hovenkamp & Grayson, P.C., Fleming Law Firm, PLLC, and Fleming & Associates, L.L.P, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-a-dardas-individually-and-dba-dardas-associates-and-bill-texapp-2006.