Director...............................................Scott Lindsey (Term Ends 2028) Bar Bulletin
Graphics/Production Elizabeth Banda
Tarrant County Bar
PRESIDENT'S PAGE
MARVINA ROBINSON 2025–2026 TCBA President
And, just like that, it’s fall, and the Cowboys in four short weeks have managed to find my last good nerve. I manage teams in three fantasy leagues. That means there are, at least, 33 individuals vying for that same nerve at any given time for the next 14 weeks or so. Two of the leagues are mostly attorneys. It's a real hoot! Fortunately, I enjoy the back and forth, the trash-talking and, when I get them, the bragging rights.
“In football, every game starts long before kickoff.”
There are hours (sometimes unbillable) of practice, endless drills, and countless plays rehearsed until it is second nature. All of it comes together on the field. In this extraordinary and noble profession to which some have all but dedicated their lives, our fields look different, but the principle is the same across practices. Every brief we draft, every call we take, everything we say, everything we are sure not to say, every CLE course we attend, every moment we dedicate to understanding the law and our clients’ needs, those are our practice reps. The courtroom, the negotiation table, mediation, hard conversations with clients, even harder conversations with disgruntled clients, is where we are tested. Those are our game days.
Sometimes we win. Sometimes we lose. Sometimes, the stats do not reflect all that really happened in the game. Sometimes instant replay by the court reporter is not in your client's best interest. Think about that blatantly non-legal, desperate objection you made in your best fancy-pants lawyer voice and demeanor that was intended to salvage a mediocre witness immediately drew a yellow flag from opposing counsel. You saw it flying onto the bench, but you stood with a straight face. (By the way, if this lawyer thing doesn't work out for you, your poker game will not pay the rent.) You were, at least, outwardly, confident in the play you called. The ruling on the field confirmed your contention. The look in your eyes and that tight-lipped smile gave you away. You and your team celebrated.
A few months later, that sometimes-pesky appellate booth review wiped that smile clean off your face. One game. One opposing team. One win that is now a loss. Fortunately, it
is a long season. There is plenty of time to rack up in the "W" column. Consider this: some managers have committed three, four, even five decades to the league. We commend them for their dedication to this profession.
Like any great team, we as members of the Bar must rely on one another. Only in Hollywood and fiction novels, does one win a game alone. That includes the quarterback with the best arm and who will stay in the pocket until something good develops downfield, the coach with the best plays and temperament, and even the star running back who breaks tackles, jumps over defensive players and risks injury to break the plane. That ain't enough! It takes the offensive line holding firm, the receivers running their routes with precision and confidence while also being willing to take a big hit, the defense reading every move, and the special teams stepping up in pivotal moments to show what they are really made of. So, too, in our profession, we succeed when we combine our strengths. As attorneys, we rely on judges, court reporters, bailiffs, mediators, counselors, advocates, process servers, investigators, mentors, etc. as we play our role in pursuit of justice. To that end, every case is the Super Bowl of Super Bowls.
This fall, I urge you to keep that spirit of teamwork alive. Just as football teaches us to push forward yard by yard, let us remain determined when the cases are tough and moving unpredictably slow. If you need another player to substitute for a few downs, do it without hesitation. If you need a time-out of any duration, to maintain good emotional and mental health, that, too, should be done without hesitation. (tlaphelps.org) We are well-trained and capable professional athletes. We shake off that game-altering pass interference call and line up for the next play. We come back stronger after injured reserve. Over time, we learn when and how to approach the referee. We weather the rulings. We play in the cold and in the rain. We face the future with resilience knowing there are more games to be played.
“After all, who doesn't love a good comeback story?”
Continued on Page 6
Continued from Page 5
Just as you likely are, I am reminded that time is precious. Fall brings shorter days, but also brighter horizons. I know it is a stretch for some of our finest colleagues, but let us rise early and not just to find a good parking spot. Let us choose to meet every practice, every huddle, every game with energy and purpose. Be confident that every waiver and every trade can work for your good, if you let it. Just continue playing your position with an “others can do it but it's my turn” attitude that causes others to work a little harder for the trophy. Then, go to the lawyer’s lounge, pull up a chair, grab a cup of coffee and belly-laugh with opposing counsel about the blown plays, missed calls, and how you are looking forward to the next game. Together, as one bar, one team, we will keep moving toward our goals. We are driving toward the goal line. While doing so, we will protect the rule of law, uplift our communities, and strengthen this profession that we all love.
TWO-MINUTE WARNING.
So, as you watch your favorite teams hit the field this season, may it inspire you to bring the same passion, grit, and unity into the Tarrant County legal community. As a reminder, in both football and law, the rewards come not just from the victory, but from the perseverance, the camaraderie, and the commitment to excellence along the way.
Go ahead and suit up for this season. Bring your courage and
conviction to the bench and the bar. Great work is common among Tarrant County Bar Association members. You are stars in your own right. The work of justice and fairness is ahead and often difficult, but this is our game. Let’s play it well. g
Members of the 2025-2026 100 Club
*List Reflected Below is as of October 3, 2025
Adams, Lynch & Loftin, P.C
Albert, Neely & Kuhlmann, LLP
Anderson & Cummings, LLP
Anderson & Riddle, LLP
Baker Monroe, PLLC
Barlow Garsek & Simon, LLP
Blaies & Hightower, L.L.P.
Bonds Ellis Eppich Schafer Jones, LLP
Bourland, Wall & Wenzel, P.C.
Brackett & Ellis, P.C.
Brown, Proctor & Howell, LLP
Bruner & Bruner, PC
City Attorney’s Office – City of Fort Worth
Cook Children’s Health Care System
– Legal Department
Curnutt & Hafer, L.L.P.
Decker Jones, P.C.
Dismuke & Waters, P.C.
Factor, Campbell & Baker
Freeman Mills P.C.
Friedman, Suder & Cooke, P.C.
Gardner Smith & Vaughan, PLLC
Griffith, Jay, & Michel, LLP
Harris, Finley & Bogle, P.C.
Harrison Steck, P.C.
Haynes and Boone, LLP
Holland Johns & Penny LLP
Jackson Walker LLP
Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP
Killen & Dennis, PC
KoonsFuller, P.C.
Law Offices of Paup, Shutt & Associates, P.C.
Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP
Lively & Associates, PLLC
McDonald Sanders, P.C
Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, PLLC
Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC
Noteboom – The Law Firm
Padfield & Stout, LLP
Patterson Law Group
Pham Harrison, LLP
Phelps Dunbar LLP
Pope, Hardwicke, Christie, Schell, Kelly & Taplett, L.L.P.
Robbins Travis PLLC
Ross & Matthews P.C.
Second Court of Appeals
Stoy Law Group, PLLC
Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office
Taylor, Olson, Adkins, Sralla & Elam, LLP
The Blum Firm, P.C.
The Colaneri Firm, P.C.
Underwood Law Firm, PLLC
Varghese Summersett PLLC
Vartabedian Hester & Haynes LLP
Watson, Caraway, Midkiff & Luningham, LLP
Whitaker Chalk Swindle & Schwartz PLLC
Whitley Penn, LLP
Wick Phillips
Winstead PC
To be eligible for the 100 Club, any law firm, government agency, law school, or corporate legal department with four or more members must attain 100% TCBA membership compliance for the 2025–2026 bar year. This qualifies them for the “100 Club.” The firms/ organizations listed above have already paid their membership dues and qualify for 100 Club membership
for the new bar year. Any firm/organization that qualifies in the future will have its name published in every issue of the Bar Bulletin for this bar year. TCBA takes pride in the participation of these law firms and other groups. The new bar year began on July 1. If you have not paid your renewal invoice, please contact Tiffany Myles at tiffany@tarrantbar.org. g
YLA SNAPSHOT
TJOHN EASTER
OLA CAMPBELL
2025–2026 TCYLA President
2024–2025 TCYLA President
he Tarrant County Young Lawyers Association Board of Directors for the new 2025–2026 term brings together a mix of experienced leaders and fresh faces. Our returning directors include Alyssa Flores, Desireé Malone, Emily Ledford, Kelsey Linendoll, Marissa Matthews, Paul H. Farmer, Jr., Riley Waters, and Stefan Garcia, while Jared Hendrix, John Thomas, Katherine Durham, and Kirsten McIntyre are joining us for the first time as directors. That balance of continuity and new energy positions us well to build on the strong foundation laid in years past while also welcoming new ideas and perspectives. We are also fortunate to have a Marylynn Smitherman as Vice President and Julia Gurney Hood as Secretary-Treasurer for this upcoming term. Alongside them, I will be serving as President, with the guidance and support of our past presidents and the many volunteers who make TCYLA thrive.
At its core, TCYLA is about connection—connection to peers, to mentors, to opportunities for professional growth, and to our community. We do this through a mix of social events, professional development, and community service projects. These touchpoints help new lawyers find their footing in the profession while also building lasting friendships and relationships within the larger legal community.
To help with fostering those connections, two major events are on the calendar for September/October that we are especially excited about:
• Fall Fête – September 18, 2025. This was our first big social event of the term, and we want to thank everyone who was able to participate in kicking off the new term in style at Flying Saucer.
• Order on the Court: Pickleball Tournament – October 30, 2025. Pickleball has quickly become one of our most spirited events, and we can’t wait to see returning champions, new competitors, and plenty of spectators out on the courts and in costume for the Halloween festivities.
While TCYLA exists to support and connect younger lawyers, our success has always depended on the engagement and encouragement of the Tarrant County Bar Association membership. We value the support of attorneys and law firms who sponsor events, provide mentorship, and cheer on the
next generation of Tarrant County lawyers. For many of us, those connections are the difference between just practicing law and truly finding a place in this profession.
To the TCBA membership: we welcome you to attend our events, share your wisdom, and encourage you and your colleagues to support TCYLA. Whether it is through sponsorship, mentorship, or simply showing up, your involvement makes a difference.
To the TCYLA membership: take advantage of what is being offered this year, and don’t hesitate to reach out if you have ideas for new initiatives or events—we want this organization to reflect your needs and ambitions.
I am grateful for the chance to serve as the TCYLA President and look forward to working with our outstanding board and members, as well as the greater Tarrant County bar as a whole. Please follow us on Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn to stay updated on events.
Here’s to a successful 2025–2026 term—I look forward to seeing you at the Pickleball Tournament, upcoming CLEs and happy hours, and beyond. g
1L Welcome Luncheon
TEXAS A&M SCHOOL OF LAW'S CLASS OF 2028
On Friday, August 29, the Tarrant County Bar Association, in partnership with Texas A&M School of Law, hosted a come-and-go luncheon to welcome the incoming Class of 2028. Held at the TCBA offices, the event offered a valuable opportunity for local judges and attorneys to meet and connect with first-year law students in an informal setting. Over lunch, members of the legal community shared insights, encouragement, and a warm welcome as these future lawyers begin their journey in the profession. g
At the Membership Luncheon on October 15 at 12:00 PM at Palmwood (Frost Tower), members will consider amendments to the TCBA Bylaws. A copy of the proposed amendment shall be on file at the TCBA’s office prior to the meeting and is available for review here: Proposed Bylaws (Redline) | Proposed Bylaws (Clean). Members are encouraged to attend.
Heidi Angel Probate
John Brookman Mediation
Tiffany Burks Criminal
Joe Cleveland Federal
Nikki Chriesman-Green In-House Counsel
Scott Lindsey Appellate
Seth McCloskey Civil Lu Pham Employment
Marvina Robinson Protective Orders
Whitney Vaughan Family
Tarrant County Volunteer Attorney Services
By Sarah Hall Hoffman, Pro Bono Programs Director
TVAS and Fortress Host Free General Advice Clinic
Tarrant County Volunteer Attorney Services (TVAS) partnered with Fortress to offer a free General Advice Clinic to their clients. Doré Rothberg Law, P.C. sponsored the clinic and helped staff attorneys to provide general advice. g
Thank you to the Fortress General Advice Clinic Volunteers (L to R): Mike Gilmore, Reba Martin, Sara Vargas, Brighton Frost, Brent Doré, and Hunter Jones.
Thank you to Doré Rothberg Law, P.C. for sponsoring the TVAS General Advice Clinic.
The Fort Worth Paralegal Association was founded in 1982 to promote the professional objectives and goals of paralegals. The Association conducts programs of continuing education and professional development. It promotes the advancement of high standards of integrity and professionalism for paralegals to the end that both the public and the legal profession are better served. Members of the Fort Worth Paralegal Association are active volunteers for a number of civic, charitable, and community events such as Tarrant County Volunteer Attorney Services, Tarrant County Food Bank, Main Street Arts Festival, Susan G. Koman Foundation, Make a Wish Foundation, Mission Metroplex, Salvation Army, and Goodfellows. Tarrant County Volunteer Attorney Services is recognizing FWPA as TVAS Community Partner for their service to TVAS and its mission to serve the Tarrant County community. Members of Fort Worth Paralegal Association attend every TVAS clinic and the contribution they make is vital to the success of the program. g
July/August 2025 Civil District Court Jury Trial Verdicts LOCAL JURY TRIAL VERDICTS
7/1/2025-8/31/2025 sorted by judgment date.*
*Does not include cases designated as “on appeal” with the Clerk’s Office as of 9/19/2025.
Dori Seimet v. Reagan M. Street, MD, et al.
342-336158-22
Hon. Kimberly Fitzpatrick (342nd District Court)
Trial: June 4–9, 2025 Judgment: July 10, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff: Jackson Davis
Attorneys – Defendant: William Arthur Newman
Summary:
Plaintiff, as representative of the estate of Dori Seimet, brought claims against Reagan M. Street, MD; Regan M. Street MD PLLC; and Texas Oncology, PA. The jury found no liability for the Defendants. The court entered a take-nothing judgment in favor of the Defendants, taxing costs of court against the Plaintiff.
Steven Rubalcaba v. Fatah Abdul, et al.
141-341144-23
Hon. John Chupp (141st District Court)
Trial: April 7–8, 2025
Judgment: July 15, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff(s): Kim Jones Penepacker
Attorneys – Defendant(s): Mark Teague
Summary:
Plaintiff filed a motor vehicle negligence claim. The jury found Defendant negligent and awarded
Plaintiff $5,921.17 for past physical pain and mental anguish and $69,078.83 for medical expenses.
Charles Thompson v. Daniel Cho, D.M.D.
348-321768-20
Hon. Megan Fahey (348th District Court)
Trial: July 14–15, 2025
Judgment: July 18, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff: Rodney J. Gappelberg
Attorneys – Defendant: Vernon L. Krueger
Summary:
Plaintiff alleged negligent failure of ordinary care in dentistry. The jury unanimously found Defendant was not negligent. The court entered a take-nothing judgment in favor of Defendant, taxing costs against Plaintiff.
Ernesto Mariscal v. Gene
Lindsey Garry
348-348599-23
Hon. Megan Fahey (348th District Court)
Trial: April 14
Judgment: July 24, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff(s): David Allen
Attorneys – Defendant(s): Freddie Gabriel
Summary:
Plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit arising from an
incident in Tarrant County. The jury found both parties at fault, assigning 80% responsibility to Defendant and 20% to Plaintiff. Despite the apportionment of liability, the jury awarded no damages. The court entered a final judgment that Plaintiff take nothing, dismissing the claims with prejudice.
Damon Borders v. Aaron Herrera 141-349603-24
Hon. John Chupp (141st District Court)
Trial: July 7-9, 2025 Judgment: July 25, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff(s): Carlos Cortez
Attorneys – Defendant(s): Stefan Garcia
Summary:
Plaintiff filed a motor vehicle negligence claim. The jury found Defendant negligent and awarded $33,029.55 for past medical care expenses, while awarding no damages for pain, mental anguish, or future medical expenses.
Ignacio Lopez v. J. L. Muhammad-Graham
141-351302-24
Hon. John Chupp (141st District Court)
Trial: March 10, 2025 Judgment: July 25, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff(s):
Alex Gonzalez
Ryan Robertson
Kristopher Salado
Attorneys – Defendant(s): Michael Gorman
Summary:
Plaintiff filed a motor vehicle negligence claim. The jury returned a zeroverdict, and the court entered a take-nothing judgment in favor of Defendant.
Gerald R. Calton v. Pappas Restaurants, Inc. d/b/a Pappadeaux Restaurants 017-345026-23
Hon. Melody Wilkinson (17th Judicial District Court) Trial: July 15 – July 16, 2025 Judgment: July 28, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff(s):
Barbara J. Hudson
Debra V. Jennings
Attorneys – Defendant(s): Michael A. Logan
Summary:
Plaintiff claimed to have suffered damages after eating a meal at Defendant’s restaurant. The jury (10–2) found that Defendant was not negligent.
Danielle Nichole Gage v. George Poteet Jr. 348-334142-22
Hon. Megan Fahey
(348th District Court)
August 4–5, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff(s): Charbel El Kareh
Attorneys – Defendant(s): Pro se
Summary:
Defendant George Poteet stipulated to liability for causing a rear-end collision. The jury considered damages only and awarded Plaintiff $1,114,635 for pain, mental anguish, impairment, and medical expenses, plus $92,737.96 in pre-judgment interest, with post-judgment interest set at 7.5% per year.
Dori Rosa Rodarte, et al. v. Laura Jackson
342-353373-24
Hon. Kimberly Fitzpatrick (342nd District Court)
Trial: July 28-29, 2025 Order: August 22, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff(s): Monica Lopez-Barnard
Attorneys – Defendant(s): Kelly Crain
Summary:
Plaintiffs, individually and as next friend of a minor, alleged negligence against Defendant arising from a motor vehicle collision.
In a 10–2 verdict, the jury
apportioned liability equally between Rodarte and Jackson. The jury awarded $9,000 each to Rodarte and Leijas and $2,607 to the minor, which the court reduced by 50%.
Danny Flores, Jennifer Smith, and Melissa Flores, Individually and as Heirs of Sharon Flores v. Dr. Keith Vasenius, Columbia Plaza Medical Center d/b/a Medical City Fort Worth 017-338487-22
Hon. Melody Wilkinson (17th Judicial District Court)
Trial: June 25–30, 2025
Judgment: August 15, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff(s): Jackson Davis Attorneys – Defendant(s): Landon L. Krueger Summary:
Plaintiffs brought a wrongful death and survival action alleging negligence in the diagnosis and treatment of Sharon Flores. The jury (11–1) found that neither party was the proximate cause of her death. The court entered a take-nothing judgment in favor of Defendants.
Alejandrina Soto v. Paul Juarez
067-349504-24
Hon. Donald J. Cosby (67th Judicial District Court)
Trial: August 5–6, 2025
Judgment: August 28, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff(s):
Brandon Watson Collins
Ramon Eduardo Gonzalez
Sean Beck
Attorneys – Defendant(s):
Andrew Seibert
Jeffrey Ryan Gardner Summary:
Plaintiff sued for negligence arising from a May 16, 2022, vehicle collision, seeking damages for medical expenses, pain and suffering, and physical impairment. The jury unanimously found Defendant’s acts were not the proximate cause of the occurrence. The court entered a takenothing judgment in favor of Defendant.
Juanita Burch and William Burch v. MCLP Asset Company, Inc., Selene Finance LP, HomeStar Group, LLC
096-350140-24
Hon. J. Patrick Gallagher
(96th Judicial District Court)
Trial: July 28–29, 2025
Judgment: August 7, 2025
Attorneys – Plaintiff(s):
Bruce Monning
Attorneys – Defendant(s):
Jared M. King
Jonathan C. Smith
Michael J. Burns
Summary:
Plaintiffs sued for wrongful foreclosure and improper notice after defaulting on a mortgage. The jury (10–2) found Plaintiffs received proper statutory and contractual notice of default, that two Defendants abandoned their right to accelerate the note, and that the third Defendant neither induced bankruptcy nor violated the escrow order. The court entered a takenothing judgment in favor of Defendants.
Thank you to the Bulletin Committee including: Natalia Ciarrocchi
Chandler Dean Benjamin Gibbs Armana Muhammad Madeline Pass
Thank you to Tom Wilder and the Tarrant County District Clerk’s Office.
Generational Divides, AI, and Employment Law Challenges for Counsel
By Nikki Chriesman-Green Senior Employment Counsel, Amdocs
Introduction
American workplaces are facing a dual transformation: the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and the increasing diversity of a workforce that now spans four generations. Baby Boomers, Generation X, Millennials, and Generation Z share the same workplaces, yet bring very different levels of comfort and fluency with technology. This generational divide is not just a cultural talking point—it has serious implications for employment law, particularly in the context of age discrimination. Corporate counsel are uniquely situated at the center of this conversation. They must advise employers on how to adopt AI tools responsibly while ensuring compliance with anti-discrimination laws, and at the same time navigate these dynamics within their own legal departments. This article explores how AI adoption intersects with generational divides, raising new challenges in employment law. The discussion proceeds in four parts: (I) the demographic and statutory framework; (II) judicial and administrative signals linking technology and age bias; (III) the effect of AI adoption on the role of corporate counsel; and (IV) strategies for mitigating legal risks while promoting cross-generational collaboration.
Demography Meets Technology: Statutory Anchors
The modern workplace is more generationally diverse than ever. Baby Boomers (born 1946–1964), who now make up about one-quarter of the workforce, are largely 55 or older, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Employment Projections released in September 2023. At the other end of the spectrum, Generation Z (born after 1996 and now under 25) is the fastest-growing segment. In between are Generation X (born 1965–1980) and Millennials (born 1981–1996), who together form much of the mid-career workforce. And if you ever have trouble remembering which group you fall into, you’re not alone. I’m Gen X (born in 1976), but I still have to remind myself, especially since I keep celebrating my 30th birthday on repeat.
Studies highlight sharp differences in comfort with digital tools. A Pew Research Center survey on technology adoption (2021) and Deloitte’s Global Human Capital Trends report (2023) found that fewer than 40 percent of Baby Boomers described themselves as “very comfortable” with emerging technologies, compared to more than 70 percent of Millennials and Gen Z.
This divide matters because the law treats technology requirements as potential barriers to equal employment. The
Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and parallel state laws such as California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act all prohibit both disparate treatment and disparate impact. Although none of these laws explicitly mention AI, they apply whenever technology adoption affects protected groups disproportionately.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has already shown interest in this area. In May 2023, the EEOC issued guidance warning that algorithmic screening tools can have unintended impacts on older applicants. European regulators are also active: Article 9 of the forthcoming EU AI Act is expected to impose new obligations related to high-risk uses of AI, creating compliance challenges for multinational employers. Taken together, these developments make it clear that technology adoption decisions are no longer just business judgments. They are legal decisions with significant employment law consequences.
Doctrinal Signals: Age, Technology, and Adverse Action Courts are gradually stitching AI and digital literacy into existing age-bias jurisprudence. In O’Connor v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp., 517 U.S. 308 (1996), the Supreme Court explained that replacing an employee with someone ‘substantially younger’ could support an age discrimination claim even where both workers were over 40. Although that case did not involve technology, lower courts have extended the reasoning. In practice, requiring “technological adaptability” may serve as a proxy for age unless justified by business necessity.
The Supreme Court’s decision in decision in Smith v. City of Jackson, 544 U.S. 228 (2005) confirmed that disparate impact claims are available under the ADEA, as long as plaintiffs can identify a facially neutral practice that disproportionately harms older workers. Applying this reasoning, weighting digital literacy scores or requiring AI fluency could be challenged if those requirements consistently disfavor older employees.
The AI Pivot Inside the Corporate Law Department
Corporate counsel themselves are living examples of how generational divides affect AI adoption. Surveys by the Association of Corporate Counsel and Gartner show that younger attorneys are the most active users of AI tools for research, brief drafting, and contract review. Generation X attorneys often play intermediary roles, negotiating with vendors but voicing caution about privilege and confidentiality.
Baby Boomer attorneys, many in senior roles, express skepticism and often prefer the established processes they know.
These differences influence hiring and promotion. Some Fortune 500 companies now give candidates ‘AI literacy’ scores worth up to 20 percent of total evaluation points. Metrics like these can unintentionally reward younger candidates and disadvantage seasoned professionals, creating fertile ground for age discrimination claims under the disparate impact framework.
In the years following the pandemic, companies have increasingly cited AI efficiency gains as a rationale for workforce reductions. For instance, Amazon CEO, Andy Jassy, explained in 2025 that Amazon’s adoption of generative AI would “reduce our total corporate workforce as we get efficiency gains from using AI extensively across the company.”1 Additionally, in early 2025, Workday announced that it would lay off approximately 1,750 employees, about 8.5% of its workforce, as part of a restructuring to redirect resources toward AI investments.2
Another particularly noteworthy example involves IBM. In Rodriguez v. Int’l Bus. Machs. Corp. , No. 7:21-cv-09928 (S.D.N.Y. filed Nov. 24, 2021), 16 former employees challenged a series of company-wide “Resource Action” layoffs as violating the ADEA. Their claims were bolstered by a 2020 EEOC determination letter, which found that more than 85% of employees selected for layoffs between 2013 and 2018 were age 40 or older. The EEOC pointed to internal IBM memoranda directing managers to reduce the number of older workers in favor of “early professional hires” and so-called “digital natives.” In March 2024, Judge Vincent Briccetti denied IBM’s motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiffs had plausibly alleged systemic age discrimination under the ADEA. The case ultimately resolved in a confidential settlement in early 2025.
This sequence of events illustrates how workforce reductions justified by an employer’s pursuit of modern digital skillsets or AI-readiness can, if they disproportionately impact older employees, trigger both regulatory scrutiny and costly litigation. In short, laying off workers perceived as less technologically adaptable may achieve short-term efficiency but risks longterm legal exposure under the ADEA and related statutes.
Governing AI, Mitigating Bias, and Bridging Generations
Corporate counsel must be proactive in addressing these risks. Failing to account for generational divides when adopting AI exposes employers to both discrimination claims and reputational harm. Fortunately, established legal principles provide a foundation for risk management.
First, algorithmic impact assessments (AIAs) should be conducted to evaluate whether AI tools introduce age-related disparities. This aligns with the EEOC’s technical assistance document on assessing software and AI. Where AI influences hiring or layoff decisions, employers should document business necessity and consider less discriminatory alternatives.
Second, training programs should be designed with multiple generations in mind. Just as courts have credited
employers who tailored training to workers’ language needs, AI training must recognize different learning curves to avoid disparate impact. The National Institute of Standards and Technology’s AI Risk Management Framework emphasizes 'human-centric deployment,' reinforcing this approach.
Third, policies on privilege and confidentiality are essential. Generative AI use in legal departments poses risks of inadvertent waiver and confidentiality breaches. Courts have made clear that failing to take adequate precautions in handling electronic information can result in waiver of privilege; for example, in Victor Stanley, Inc. v. Creative Pipe, Inc., 250 F.R.D. 251 (D. Md. 2008), the court held that privilege was lost when counsel failed to implement reasonable safeguards during electronic discovery review. The lesson is readily applicable to AI: if junior attorneys or staff enter privileged information into public AI platforms without proper controls, privilege may likewise be compromised. At the same time, an outright ban on AI could conflict with the duty of technological competence recognized in the Model Rules of Professional Conduct.3 A balanced policy that both permits AI use and ensures confidentiality is therefore critical.
Finally, corporate culture matters. Mentorship programs that pair tech-savvy junior attorneys with experienced senior lawyers create opportunities for mutual learning. This not only strengthens skills but also demonstrates institutional commitment to bridging generational divides. Such programs can help employers defend against claims by showing that disparities in AI use reflect employee preference, not bias.
Conclusion
Generational divides have always shaped the workplace, but the rise of AI has turned those divides into legal flashpoints. Employment disputes once focused on overtly ageist remarks or rigid job descriptions; today they increasingly revolve around algorithmic fluency and technology-driven decisions.
Corporate counsel occupy a dual role: they must regulate how their organizations adopt AI while navigating the same challenges in their own careers. By implementing algorithmic impact assessments, tailoring training to diverse age groups, establishing confidentiality protocols, and fostering mentorship, counsel can mitigate risks and promote inclusive adoption of AI.
Ultimately, bridging generational divides in AI adoption is more than a management strategy: it is a legal imperative. Employers who recognize and address these issues will be better positioned to embrace innovation while honoring the principles of fairness embedded in employment law. g
¹ Andy Jassy, Andy Jassy on Generative AI, Amazon (June 17, 2025), https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/company-news/ amazon-ceo-andy-jassy-on-generative-ai.
² Matt Ott, Workday to Lay Off 1,750 Workers, or 8.5% of Its Workforce, as It Shifts Focus to AI, AP News (Jan. 31, 2025), https://apnews.com/article/workday-layoffs-job-cuts-aiinvestments-437581ad79d6e1cef2de7b300015dfbb.
³ Model Rules of Pro. Conduct r. 1.1 cmt. 8 (Am. Bar Ass’n 2020).
C E L E B R A T I N G
80 years
K u b e s J e w e l e r s i s c o m m i t t e d t o p r o v i d i n g t h e h i g h e s t l e v e l o f s e r v i c e , q u a l i t y a n d
v a l u e t o o u r c u s t o m e r s . W e a r e a m u l t i - g e n e r a t i o n a l f a m i l y - o w n e d j e w e l r y s t o r e a n d
m a i n t a i n a l o n g - t e r m p e r s p e c t i v e i n e v e r y a s p e c t o f o u r b u s i n e s s . W e p r o v i d e t h e
s a m e f a m i l y a t t r i b u t e s t o o u r c u s t o m e r s – T r u s t , R e l i a b i l i t y a n d R e s p e c t .
8 1 7 - 9 2 6 - 2 6 2 6
s a l e s @ k u b e s j e w e l e r s c o m
2 7 0 0 W e s t B e r r y S t . F o r t W o r t h , T e x a s 7 6 1 0 9
k u b e s j e w e l e r s . c o m
Lawyers Can Still Trust a Handshake in this Town
By Steven C. Laird Law Offices of Laird & McCloskey | laird@texlawyers.com
Abroad brush seems to paint all lawyers the same wherever they practice. People around the Tarrant County area may not know or appreciate how practicing law here differs from the rest of the state and country.
There is no question that Fort Worth continues to retain so much of its original heritage that helped to establish this area as “where the West begins,” and our history is filled with periods and characters that had little to do with trust and reliability. Even so, it’s clear that our legal profession here has always enjoyed a well-deserved reputation for being honest and trustworthy. Lawyers who come to Fort Worth for a legal matter are constantly amazed at how comfortable the practice of law is in this community compared to so many other places. In fact, lawyers from outside of this area frequently underestimate our friendliness and learn the hard way that Fort Worth lawyers can still be polite but extremely effective for their clients.
We live in an era when many people think that law is actually practiced the way they watch it on a variety of legal television dramas. These lawyers are primarily portrayed as uncaring and untrustworthy, interested only in self-gain. They are somehow able to sandwich in multiple cases from start to finish in a period of about 48 minutes.
Can you imagine a legal show where lawyers are cunning without deceit? Where a lawyer would only need to back up an agreement with his or her word or a handshake? Where lawyers from many parts of the rest of the state, or even the nation, enjoy the opportunity to come to a place where the practice of law is still considered an honor? Fort Worth Law would be far different than L.A. Law, although it would be just as compelling.
It's not just the Tarrant County lawyers who enjoy a great reputation outside of this area, but the local judges, as well. Lawyers who come to Tarrant County are pleasantly surprised to find that the judiciary is much the same as the rest of our legal community. They are approachable and friendly but still expect all lawyers to be professional, knowledgeable, and prepared when practicing in front of them.
One of the other biggest differences between Tarrant County and so many other urban areas, both in and out of Texas, is the professionalism of the courthouse staff. Their attitude is unsurpassed in being helpful and courteous. Lawyers from outside this area constantly praise the professionalism of those who work at the courthouse.
So why is practicing law in this county so different than
in other places? One of the reasons is because we still enjoy a continuation of tradition. Honor and integrity still mean something to lawyers and judges in this town. Those lawyers who attempt to set up gotcha traps are looked upon with disfavor, although such practices continue to be more commonplace in many other urban areas. That type of litigator has been known as a “Rambo Lawyer” and never been appreciated or accepted within our bar. Lawyers here continue to show that effective legal strategy and knowledge of the law is still the best way to successfully represent a client.
The general esprit d’ corps of the Tarrant County legal community in no way prevents zealous representation of our clients. Even with the tradition and integrity still existing among Tarrant County lawyers, the members of our bar are still known to be formidable and capable lawyers.
The proof is in the pudding, so to speak, as shown by the fact that so many law firms and lawyers in our community are sought out by corporations and individuals from other parts of the state and nation. It is not uncommon for a corporation headquartered elsewhere to select a Tarrant County law firm to represent it nationally or internationally. Lawyers from other areas of the state and country frequently associate local counsel from our legal community to handle or assist on major cases. Believe me, they don’t do this just because we happen to be nice people, but it doesn’t hurt, and it truly makes a difference. The Tarrant County Bar has proven that zealous client advocacy does not have to sacrifice integrity and ethics.
In short, lawyers who come to Fort Worth find a unique mixture of tradition, professionalism and honor within our local legal community. That broad brush that seems to paint almost all lawyers the same should have a separate canvas for the Tarrant County legal community. It truly continues to be an original.
Originally appearing in the Fort Worth Report, this article is reprinted with permission from the author. Although written years ago, its insights continue to resonate and hold renewed significance today. g
PROGRAM COMMITTEE
By Megan Cooley
Texas Wesleyan University Committee Chair
Mentorship Matters: Supporting the Next Generation of Attorneys
It is my honor to serve as the Chair of the Tarrant County Bar Association’s Mentorship Program this year. The Mentorship Program focuses on ways to support new attorneys in their practice and encourages mentorship in our bar community. On behalf of the program, I am writing to share the plans and events of the committee this year.
We are lucky to have Steve Laird share his time and experience with our bar community through monthly programming. Over the past few years, Steve developed and hosted a series of Mentor Monday luncheons. The luncheons included well respected attorneys who shared their experience and lessons learned with new attorneys. The events are free and open to all members. I encourage new attorneys to attend an upcoming program.
The Mentorship Program is working with the Tarrant County Young Lawyers again this year in matching new attorneys and law students with mentors. I participated in this program, and it was one of the highlights of my year to meet and get to know the TCYLA lawyers. I highly recommend it. The Mentorship Program committee will meet in October
Amy Allen
Brittany Allen-Brantley
Nick Bettinger
Robert Blankenship
Julie Camacho
Sara Correa
Dvorah Cristol
Ndidi Gbulie
Lisa Jones
Merrit Klapperich
Deborah Krane
Reba Martin
Cynthia Maragoudakis
Angelia Megahan
George Muckleroy
Ricardo Ochoa
Arin Schall
to plan CLE programming for this year. The CLE will focus on hearing and learning from both sides of mentorship – the mentors and mentees. We will share more information about the CLE as it is planned.
If you can’t participate in a bar program and are interested in mentoring, there are a number of ways to connect with new lawyers and law students. It can be as simple as looking out for new faces at a bar event and welcoming them. TCBA’s sections and committees are also places that could include intentional efforts to offer new attorneys and law students an opportunity to meet and learn from experienced attorneys.
Our bar has a well-earned reputation of collegiality and professionalism, and its on-going mentorship efforts are fundamental to the continued growth and success of our profession. Thanks to the many of you who share their time and knowledge with new attorneys and law students.
The Mentorship Program is always open to hearing your input or ideas. Feel free to reach out to the Bar if you would like to join the committee or contact me at cooley@txwes.edu. I would love to hear from you and appreciate your time and input. g
By Sarah Hall Hoffman, Pro Bono Programs Director
Upcoming Volunteer Dates
Easement Essential: Key Aspects Every Attorney Should Know
By Perry Cockerell Perry Cockerell, P.C. | perry@perrycockerell.com
An easement is a nonpossessory interest in real property that authorizes its holder to use another’s property for a particular purpose. In Texas, there are many ways to establish an easement over real property. An easement can be created by contract, agreement, or imposed by law through common law or statutory methods.
Express Easement
An express easement is created by a written contract or conveyance of property. The agreement must furnish or incorporate a valid property description. The express terms of the easement determine the scope of the easement holder’s rights. The court construes the purpose of the agreement by the intention of the parties based on the language in the instrument and surrounding circumstances.1
When the contract language can be given a certain or definite meaning, then the language is not ambiguous. An ambiguity exists if the contract leaves an agreement susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation. Common disputes in express easements involve access to lakefront property and whether gates can be installed. A party is entitled to the full width of an easement.
Implied Easements
Implied easements are created when they are not mentioned in the conveyance or agreement. There are two types of implied easements: necessity and prior use.
Necessity: A necessity easement requires proof of: (1) unity of ownership of the dominant and servient estates prior to severance; (2) the claimed access is a necessity and not a mere convenience; and (3) the necessity existed at the time the two estates were severed. Once a necessity easement arises, it continues until the necessity terminates. There must be no other legal access to the property. The location of the easement may be established at the time of the conveyance by a separate agreement and does not have to be written. When access to a public road by a landlocked property is at issue, a necessity easement is the only type of claim that can be made.
In an effort to clarify the law, in 2014 the Texas Supreme Court in Hamrick v Ward, 446 S.W.3d 377 (Tex. 2014) reversed its decision in Bickler v Bickler, 403 S.W.2d 354, 357 (Tex.1966) that allowed the concept of “prior use” to establish access to a public road. Hamrick, in some cases, has created a serious evidentiary problem where use of the road for many years is undisputed but proof of the existence of the public road at the time of severance may be lacking due to the loss of documentation or witnesses being unavailable. It might be appropriate for the Texas Legislature to codify the Bickler decision and allow “prior use” to be available, once again, to prove access to a public road.
Prior use: A prior use easement requires: (1) unity of ownership of the dominant and servient estates prior to severance; (2) the use of the property was open and apparent at the time of severance; (3) the use was continuous, so the
parties must have intended that its use pass by grant; and (4) the use must be necessary to the use of the dominant estate.2 When examining an implied easement by prior use, it is necessary to examine whether the easement is based on a grant or reservation. If the easement is by reservation, then there must be proof of a strict necessity.3 The Texas Supreme Court has not decided whether a party must demonstrate a strict necessity or merely a reasonable necessity if prior use is by way of grant.
Easement by Estoppel
An easement by estoppel can be created when there is: (1) a representation of an easement communicated, either by words or action, to the promisee, (2) the communication was believed; and (3) the promisee detrimentally relied on the communication.4
A verbal agreement is sufficient to support an easement by estoppel claim. An easement by estoppel cannot be based on silence or passive acquiescence. Improvements made on land must be made in reliance of representations made. There is no duty to speak if the other party has equal access to the facts. Texas courts are split as to whether a vendor-vendee relationship is required to establish an easement by estoppel.
Easement by Prescription
An easement by prescription is established in the same manner as a claim of adverse possession. The use must be adverse, open, notorious, continuous, and exclusive for the requisite 10-year period. There must be exclusive use, not joint use, of the access way.5
Easement by Dedication
A road may become a public road either: (1) by act of the commissioners’ court establishing it as public, (2) by prescription, or (3) by dedication. A statutory public road is one that has been laid out and established according to law and that has not been discontinued.6 There are two types of dedications: express and implied. An express dedication is accomplished by a deed or other written instrument. An implied dedication is made by a competent person induced to make the dedication with donative intent; there must be a public purpose served by the dedication; an offer or tender of dedication; and an acceptance of the offer or tender. Donative intent can be established when the access is shrouded in obscurity and involves long continuous use. Acceptance of the road does not require a formal or express acceptance. Acceptance can be implied. g
1 Marcus Cable Associates, L.P. v. Krohn, 90 S.W.3d 697, 700 (Tex. 2002).
5 Albert v. Fort Worth & W. R.R. Co., 690 S.W.3d 92, 98 (Tex. 2024).
6 Linder v. Hill, 691 S.W.2d 590, 592 (Tex. 1985).
11:30 a.m. CHECK-IN
Box Lunches Provided
12:00 p.m. Charge Error After Horton
Jody Sanders, Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP
12:30 p.m. Permissive Appeals
Cliffie Wesson, Fifth Court of Appeals, Dallas
Lisa West, Second Court of Appeals, Fort Worth
1:15 p.m. COA Clerk
Clarissa Hodges, Clerk of Court, Second Court of Appeals, Fort Worth
1:45 p.m. Brief Writing
Justice Elizabeth Kerr, Second Court of Appeals, Fort Worth
2:15 p.m. BREAK
2:30 p.m. Q&A with the Dallas Court of Appeals
Justices from the Fifth Court of Appeals, Dallas
3:15 p.m. Court of Criminal Appeals
Presiding Judge David J. Schenck, Court of Criminal Appeals
3:45 p.m. Supreme Court of Texas
Justice Brett Busby, Supreme Court of Texas
4:15 p.m. RECEPTION
Snippets
ASK JUDGE BOB
Co-Editor
Judge Carey Walker, County Criminal Court No. 2
Civil and Criminal
by Judge Bob McCoy g County Criminal Court No. 3
2. Fourth Amendment
Judge Bob, does “shall” mean “must”?
Not necessarily.
And although the word “shall” is generally construed to be mandatory, it may be and frequently is held to be merely directory. But we have never equated directory with discretionary.
Image API, LLC v Young, 691 S.W.3d 831 (Tex. 2024).
THE PACK’S MONTHLY
PARAPROSDAKIAN (a figure of speech in which the latter part of a sentence or phrase is surprising or unexpected; frequently humorous)
Where there’s a will, there’s usually a family fight.
Abigail, Mary, and Martha Elijah
THE PACK’S QUOTE OF THE MONTH
In order to really enjoy a dog, one doesn’t merely try to train him to be semihuman. The point of it is to open oneself to the possibility of becoming partly a dog.
—Edward Hoagland, “Dogs and the Tug of Life”
THE Editor's NOTES FROM THE FARM
Many a great man has been found under a shabby old hat.
CRIMINAL ITEMS OF INTEREST
1.
Ineffective Assistance
Evaluating claims of ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment involves a two-pronged test: (1) whether counsel was deficient, and (2) whether the defendant suffered prejudice as a result of counsel’s error. To establish that counsel’s actions were deficient, the appellant must show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that counsel’s actions fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. Hart v. State, 667 S.W.3d 774 (Tex.Crim.App. 2023).
Under the attenuation-of-taint doctrine, “evidence is admissible when the connection between unconstitutional police conduct and the discovery of evidence is remote or has been interrupted by some intervening circumstance, so that ‘the interest protected by the constitutional guarantee that has been violated would not be served by suppression of the evidence obtained.’”
Massey v. State, 667 S.W.3d 784 (Tex.Crim.App. 2023).
3. Municipal Court
To perfect an appeal from the judgment of a municipal court of record, the defendant must file a motion for new trial setting out “the points of error on which the appellant complains.” The reviewing court must decide the appeal “on the basis of the errors that are set forth in the appellant’s motion for new trial and that are presented in the clerk’s record and reporter’s record.” Moreover, “an appeal from the municipal court of record may not be by trial de novo.”
Felts v. State, 668 S.W.3d 69 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2022).
4. Jury Instructions
“Because a trial court’s answer to a jury’s question must comply with the same rules that govern charges, the trial court, as a general rule, must limit its answer to setting forth the law applicable to the case; it must not express any opinion as to the weight of the evidence, sum up the testimony, discuss the facts, or use any response calculated to arouse the sympathy or excite the passions of the jury.” “If the request from a jury for additional instructions is not proper, the court should refer the jury to the court’s charge.”
Harris v. State, 668 S.W.3d 83 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2022).
5. Interpreters
A defendant who cannot understand English is entitled to a court-appointed interpreter. To preserve error regarding an issue with the interpreter’s qualification, an objection must be raised at trial.
Huerta v. State, 668 S.W.3d 155 (Tex.App.—Amarillo 2023).
6. Hearsay
An exception to the hearsay rule’s public records exception excludes the admission of law enforcement’s crime-scene or investigation observations because such observations, opinions, and narrations are made while the officer is engaged in the
often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime and are thus inherently adversarial and less reliable than other types of public records.
Karr v. State, 685 S.W.3d 206 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 2024).
7. Suppression Hearing
At a suppression hearing, a trial court is the exclusive trier of fact and judge of the witnesses’ credibility. Accordingly, a trial court may choose to believe or disbelieve all or any part of a witness’s testimony.
Johnson v. State, 682 S.W.3d 638 (Tex.App.—Tyler 2024).
CIVIL ITEMS OF INTEREST
1.
Jurisdictional Defects
Courts are empowered to note potential jurisdictional defects sua sponte, and by doing so, a court “discharges its duty to ensure that the court itself is functioning in an authorized and properly judicial capacity.
Hidalgo Water IMPR. v Hidalgo, IRR., 669 S.W.3d 178 (Tex. 2023).
2. County Judge
The Constitution vests the judicial power of the State in various courts, including County Courts, Commissioners Courts, and “such other courts as may be provided by law.” The Constitution provides for a County Court, a Commissioners Court, and a County Judge in each county. The County Judge presides over the County Court as a judicial officer but over the Commissioners Court, which handles county business operations, as an executive officer.
Ditech Servicing, LLC v Perez, 669 S.W.3d 188 (Tex. 2023).
3. Legal Malpractice
A plaintiff claiming legal malpractice must prove that the defendant breached a duty it owed to the plaintiff and proximately caused the plaintiff an injury. If the plaintiff asserts that an attorney’s negligence resulted in the denial of actual damages, then the plaintiff must also prove, in reasonable probability, that it would have collected those damages in the underlying case.
USA Lending Group, Inc. v. Winstead PC , 669 S.W.3d 195 (Tex. 2023).
4. A Plea to the Jurisdiction
Because immunity from suit implicates subject-matter jurisdiction, a defendant may properly raise the defense in a plea to the jurisdiction. A plea to the jurisdiction does not authorize an inquiry so far into the substance of the claims that plaintiffs would be required to put on their case to establish jurisdiction.
Pepper Lawson Horizon Int’l Group v TSU, 669 S.W.3d 205 (Tex. 2023).
5. Statutory Terms
Statutory terms usually bear their common or ordinary meaning. Id, When a statute defines one of its terms, however,
“[w]e do not look to the ordinary, or commonly understood, meaning of the term because the Legislature has supplied its own definition, which we are bound to follow.”
Bexar Appraisal Dist. V Johnson, 691 S.W.3d 844 (Tex. 2024).
6. Harassing Conduct
The parties agree that, in this case, the standard for liability requires evidence that the employer “knew or should have known of the conduct” and failed to take promp remidial action. In other words, an employer is liable if it is negligent in having actual or constructive knowledge of the harassment and failing to take prompt remedial action to stop it.
Fossil Group, Inc. v Harris, 691 S.W.3d 874 (Tex. 2024).
7. Voidable Agreement
Contracts that are voidable due to fraud “remain[ ] enforceable” and are “voided only if the defrauded party proves a right to avoid the contract and chooses to do so.” Conversely, a party who is fraudulently induced to enter into a voidable agreement may “engage[ ] in conduct that …ratifies the agreement and waives any right to assert the fraud as basis to avoid.
We must not make a scarecrow of the law, Setting it up to fear the birds of prey, And let it keep one shape, till custom make it Their perch, and not their terror.
—William Shakespeare, Measure for Measure
QUOTE OF THE MONTH
Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor sprits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in that grey twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.
—Theodore Roosevelt, Hamilton Club, Chicago, April 10, 1899 g
HOLIDAY PARTY COMMITTEE
By Patricia Nasworhty Nasworthy Law Committee Chair
Join the Holiday Party Commitee Fun!
I’m excited to serve as this year’s Holiday Party Committee Chair! Our committee has already met and is busy planning three upcoming events you won’t want to miss:
• Boo at the Bar – October 30
• The Holiday Party – December 4
• Mardi Law – February 17
We have a great mix of returning volunteers and fresh faces, and the energy this year is fantastic. We’re fortunate to have many long-time volunteers — some serving for more than 10 years — who make this committee such a success. Come join us and see why members sign up year after year. We’d love to have you as part of the fun! g
2025 COURT STAFF AWARD RECIPIENTS
Kay Stewart | Court Coordinator
Tracey Wood |
Tiffany Niemela |
Beth Gillentine | Court Coordinator
Joshua Hearn | Bailiff Family Courts
Tammy Cooper | Deputy Clerk
MENTOR MONDAY SEMINAR SERIES
In Conversation with... Judge Pat Gallagher
Q: What first drew you to the law?
I was always interested in history, government, politics, elections, and community service. I could combine those interests with the chance to help people and the chance to make a decent living.
Q: How did your early career shape your approach to the bench?
I was very fortunate to work in my first job as a lawyer as an Assistant District Attorney for Dallas County, Texas. I was able to try 78 jury trials in two years. I got a sense of how cases could be worked up quickly, yet thoroughly, and I gained a great respect for our jury trial system.
One funny story is that, in my first felony jury trial, I was assigned the case 45 minutes before the trial was to begin. We went in and I interviewed the witnesses while the second chair picked the jury. We tried the case, and we got the robbery conviction. And that's probably the reason I have very little sympathy for lawyers who want eight-month continuances to conduct two depositions and a mediation.
Q: In your view, what’s the most important thing a young lawyer can do to build and protect their professional reputation?
Always be honest. Lawyers talk and judges talk. Fort Worth and Tarrant County are relatively tight-knit, close legal communities. I will say that the vast majority of attorneys in Tarrant County are very fine, upstanding, reputable, honest, and trustworthy. But every lawyer and every judge can give you specific examples of when that is not the case. It’s very unfortunate when that happens, and it’s rare. But word gets around, and lawyers who aren't trustworthy don’t last very long.
Every young lawyer should read Jay Foonberg’s How To Start and Build A Law Practice. Whether you are working in a firm, in government, for a company, or starting your own shop, you need to set up forms, write good letters, keep good time records, and prioritize your day for maximum efficiency. This book will give you the tools to build your professional reputation.
Read everything you can by Bryan Garner so that you will write succinctly and precisely. Never use the word “same” in a proposed Order.
Q: What common mistakes do you see lawyers make, specifically in trials, that could easily be avoided?
I have had several cases lately where it's apparent that the lawyers have not read the TRCP 194.2 mandatory disclosures,
and they come to trial and want to call witnesses who have not been disclosed. They want to put on evidence of money damages that have not been disclosed. And the court doesn’t have a choice in that case. The exclusion of that evidence is mandatory if they’ve not been disclosed. If there's one rule that everybody needs to know, it's Rule 194, and you need to comply with it and give the other side your disclosures. We don't have trial by ambush anymore.
I’ve had attorneys come in and try to tell me, “Well, they knew about this because I told them about this evidence in a mediation.” Well, evidence or anything that happens in a mediation is not supposed to be disclosed to the court. The only thing the mediator reports to the court is whether the case was settled or not. And it's not a substitute for mandatory disclosures to try to tell the court that something was disclosed in a mediation, or something was disclosed in a demand letter. The court has no discretion on that. It's mandatory exclusion.
Q: Who were your mentors, and what's the best piece of advice you've carried with you?
I was very fortunate to work for Henry Wade when I first got out of law school, and Mr. Wade was the District Attorney of Dallas County, Texas, from 1950 to 1986. So, when I went to work for him in 1984, he had already been the District Attorney for 34 years and had a wealth of experience like no other. He was the Wade in Roe versus Wade. He personally prosecuted Jack Ruby and had a number of other noteworthy cases. It was just a blessing that I got to work in that office for someone who had that kind of reputation and that kind of experience. At my interview, he told me that he didn’t hire Irish people because we were too soft on crime, and that he wouldn’t put us on juries, particularly when there was drinking involved, but he was just messing with me, and I somehow got the job.
Then, when I came to Fort Worth, I worked at Fillmore, Herrick, and Harrington, and those gentlemen were the finest trial lawyers that I've ever seen. Dustin Fillmore, John Herrick, and Brooks Harrington were very different in their personalities, but they were all absolutely top-flight litigators. From Mr. Fillmore, I learned the value of how powerful it is to know the rules, to understand the law, to be up to date on the case law, and to know the rules of evidence and the rules of civil procedure backwards and forwards. He was a classic, powerful orator, a spellbinder, and his integrity was palpable. He rarely lost, representing primarily insurance companies
and large corporations like Lone Star Gas.
From Mr. Herrick, I learned the value of passion. Mr. Herrick was primarily a plaintiff's lawyer, and you could tell in his arguments that he really took his clients’ cases seriously and was concerned for their well-being. He was able to convey to the jury the sense that how this trial comes out is going to impact my client's future for the rest of his or her life, and the jury really felt that from him. His compassion and commitment came through in his courtroom presence.
From Rev. Harrington, who was my direct mentor and taught me the nuts and bolts about how to prepare a case for trial and do discovery, I got a sense of how the law can be used for the overall benefit of society. Although he was a Marine and a boxer and nobody’s pushover, he would refer to being a lawyer as a calling. Most recently he has represented abused women pro bono as founder of the Methodist Justice Ministry, and he conveyed that sense of duty to a young lawyer like me.
Q: If you could give one piece of advice to your younger self when you were just starting out, what would it be? I wish I had developed two or three niche areas to become
an expert in because there’s so much opportunity in different areas of law. Every young lawyer should be working towards board certification in one of the many areas where Texas leads the nation with the TBLS. Look up the qualifications and set these as goals.
I’m going to sound really old now, but at the end of this current certification period, I will have been Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law for 40 years. I am proud of the fact that I served on the Texas Board of Legal Specialization Advisory Commission for two terms, where we would review the applications for lawyers who are applying to become boardcertified in our specialty. I feel good about my level of expertise in this one area, but there are a couple of other areas that are very interesting to me that I wish I had become proficient in. g
Judge Pat Gallagher spoke at the September Mentor Monday Seminar Series, an interactive and informative session moderated by Steve Laird.
Watch the recorded session and earn 1 hour of free ethics CLE at www.tarrantbar.org/cle-mentor-monday-gallagher.
Purpose-built for your path forward
Designed specifically for legal, accounting, and client-focused professionals
Optimized for clarity and control
Smarter workflows that drive efficiency and deliver the insights you need to succeed
Supported by experts you can trust From onboarding to live support, our team is here to help you—every step of the way
One platform, many possibilities Powerful solutions built to support every part of your business and simplify your day
Judge Patricia Baca Bennett
Judge Lori DeAngelis
Judge Kristina Denapolis
Judge John Eck
Judge Megan Fahey
Judge Kimberly Fitzpatrick
Judge Jeffrey Kaitcer
Judge Susan McCoy
Judge Jesse Nevarez
Judge Jennifer Rymell
Judge Chris Taylor
Judge Melody Wilkinson
Candy Sponsors:
Justice Dabney Bassel
Boyd Powers & Williamson
Judge Don Cosby
Judge Randall Fluke
Abigail Garcia
Juris Fabrilis, Inc.
Pham Harrison, LLP
Judge Brian Stagner
TONER Home Performance
Justice Dana Womack
Event Sponsors
LAWYERS ON THE MOVE &
in the News
Taylor Franklin Joins Brackett & Ellis as an Associate Attorney
Brackett & Ellis is pleased to announce that Taylor Franklin has joined the firm as an Associate Attorney in our Commercial Litigation practice.
Taylor brings a strong background in leadership and strategic thinking, having served as an Intelligence Officer in the United States Navy prior to attending law school. He earned his J.D. from St. Mary’s University School of Law in 2020 and holds a Bachelor of Arts from Texas Christian University. g
MEMBERSHIP REPORT
Brittany Taylor Joins Brackett & Ellis as a New Attorney
Brackett & Ellis is proud to welcome Brittany Taylor as the newest member of our legal team. With over a decade of experience in Estate Planning and Probate, Brittany brings a wealth of knowledge and dedication to serving clients with integrity and care.
Brittany earned her J.D. from Texas Tech University School of Law in 2013. She also holds a Master of Science in Personal Financial Planning from Texas Tech University and a Bachelor of Business Administration, magna cum laude, from West Texas A&M University. g
By Tiffany Myles, Membership Director
TCBA Membership Update & Upcoming Events
Thank you for your continued support of our bar. Our membership continues to grow! We welcomed 163 new members since our last bulletin, which brings our membership to 2,864.
Are you looking for ways to get more involved with TCBA? Consider joining a committee. Send me an email at tiffany@tarrantbar.org and let’s discuss where you best fit.
Upcoming Events
October 18: Tails on Trails – Group Walk at the River Legacy Park in Arlington, TX
October 30: TCBA & TCFLBA’s Boo at the Bar
November 1: Volunteer Day at Opal’s Farm
November 7: Sound Bath Renewal Session
November 12: Local Bars Member Social
Committee Meetings
Wellness Committee: Meets every first Wednesday of each month via Zoom at 3 p.m.
Membership Committee: Meets every second Tuesday of each month via Zoom at 4 p.m.
Holiday Party Committee: Meets October 2 and November 4 at the TCBA Office.
Mentorship Committee: Meets October 22 via Zoom, 12 p.m. – 1 p.m.
The Wellness Committee is looking for speakers for The Balanced Bar – A Mental Wellness CLE Series. Do you know anyone with a background in psychology, counseling, psychiatry, or other mental health fields who could share evidencebased strategies applicable to the practice of law? Please send recommendations to tiffany@tarrantbar.org.
Welcome Our New TCBA Members
ATTORNEYS
Shawn Abraham
Sharesa Alexander
Roger Allen
Amber August
Jacob Bodily
Brian Brandstetter
Raul Canez
Sara Compton
Sachi Dave Rode
Shelby Douglas
Ashley Feldt
Francis Fenner
Terrance Foster
Semaj Garrett
Ellen Gillis
Bryan GonzalezMejia
Ashley Goodwin
Joshua Graham
Sara Harris
Shelby Jean
Samuel Johndroe
Jason Judd
Austin Light
Jennifer Lovelace
Samuel Manchester
Kaylee Maxon
Jodi McShan
Monty Moncrief
Jennifer Moore
Charla Moore
Khyla Morgan
Austin Muck
Rich Mysliwiec
Michael Noel
Samira Noorali
Dillan Passmore
M'Kaylee Patteson
Brian Peacock
Brenda Pfeiff
Renee Picanes
William Puls
James Reid
Ramsey Schultz
Chip Searcy
Olivia Sheppard
Doug Skierski
Monica Smith
Thomas Stutz
Brittany Taylor
Philip Teissier
Chanel Thomas
Greg Westfall
JUDICIARY
Hon. Vincent Giardino
Hon. Suzanne Hudson
ASSOCIATES
James Kelley
Timothy Koirtyohann
Kyle Morris
Jennifer O’Connell
Stephanie Thompson
Cristina Vance
LEGAL STAFF
Hunter Johnson
Riley Kelton
Nikki Parris
LAW STUDENTS
Konstantine Adams
Aasiah Allison
Molly Austin
Bella Avitia
Genesis Ayala
Katie Bai
Jeremiah Bailey
Tristan Bevan
Ashlyn Boyd
Cassandra Branson
Jacob Brecheisen
Savannah Bridges
Madison Brown
James Buzard
Mina Chaisson
Shaw-leon Chen
Andrew Chen
Natalia Ciarrocchi
Zade Creel
Caden Crum
Amisha Datta
Brianna Davis
Megan Dean
Caetlin Dempsey
Gabriel Dominguez
Adam Lheureau
Ellie Reid
Trinity Doyle
Rhains Enevoldsen
Shane Eversole
Meaghan Fitzpatrick
Forrest Freeman
Alexander Gibson
Charles Giroux
Mary Catherine
Greaney
Austin Greer
Olivia Hankins
Ashar Hashmi
Harper Hoover
Carter Howell
Theron Humphrey
Stella Iliakis
Aidan Joyce
Jack Jurgemeyer
Asia Kennett
Fariea Khan
Audrey Kilgore
Lindsey Kim
Will Knight
Jacob Knudsen
Anjani Kockonda
Lane Lacy
Elijah Larson
Emilee LaSalle
Corey Lawson
Sean LeBlanc
Andie Lisenby
Steven Lunsford
Isabela Malo
Nathaniel Maness
Ryan Martin
Ryan Martinez
Gabriella Martinez
Dylan McCoy
Eleanor McGahan
Justus Mendoza
Mattie Meyring
Cami Miranda
Richard Morin
Joshua Morton
Ainsley Naylor
August Nennmann
Abby Nguyen
Yusuf Nuwamanya
Warqaa Obaid
Adaeze Ogoazi
Kyle Oldham
Anthonia Opadijo
Lauren Osterberger
August Pazzo
Lauren Peck
Samantha Pecorale
Austin Piercy
Esther Prabahkar
Elise Presnell
Joseph Pride
James Pullen
Norma Ondarza
Joel St. John
Jake DeWitte
Alli Dimmitt
Kara Lee
Luke Leifker
Saket Puri
Nicholas Pursley
Paige Richeson
Benjamin Richter
Lauren Rigmaiden
Todd Roskop
Jeffrey Rossiter
Audrey Rytting
Laurisa Serra
Maya Serrano
Amelia Shipley
Zohaib Sidi
Priya Sinha
Sienna Snowden
Braeden Soboleski
Michael Taggart
Trevor Tankersley
Parker Taylor
Julie Tift
Sarah Turner
Mallory Valentine
Annie Valicek
Emily Van Dyke
Cameron Vance
Garrett Wagner
Colton Walker
Liam Walsh
Peyton Warren
Alexandra Watson
Tristan White
LaurenWulf
Alexandra Yi
Hallie Young
Nathan Ziegner
. . . AND NOW A WORD FROM OUR SECTIONS
By Brandon Schuelke Griffith Davison, P.C. Construction Law Section Chair
Texas Legislative Update – Recent Enactments Affecting Construction
Texas recently enacted several bills amending, updating, or clarifying certain statutes that pertain directly to the construction industry. Importantly, Texas (1) added liability protections to surveyors while establishing a standard of care for surveyors, (2) standardized energy rules across commercial and residential projects to improve energy efficiency, (3) added clarity to deadlines under Texas lien laws, (4) reformed zoning regulations to allow for more mixed-use residential and multifamily developments without requiring the need for re-zoning, (5) created a mechanism for second-tier subcontractors to assign their claims up-stream when first-tier subcontractors fail to pay, and (6) mandate that legal actions concerning construction projects be brought within the county where the property is located. While having varying degrees of anticipated effect, these changes are generally expected to help improve the construction industry within Texas.
SB 687 (effective September 1, 2025)
Senate Bill 687 expands the professional liability protections under Section 130.002 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code to include land surveyors—bringing them in line with architects and engineers regarding indemnity and standardof-care provisions. It voids clauses in construction or service contracts that require land surveyors to indemnify or defend an owner or others for harm arising from the owner’s own negligence, or from design defects in the surveyor’s work. The bill also mandates that surveyors must perform with the professional skill and care ordinarily expected of their peers practicing under similar circumstances; attempts to impose a higher standard are void. This change addresses industry concerns that surveyors were unfairly held financially responsible for third-party mistakes or conditions outside their control. By reinforcing fairness and aligning liability rules among design professionals, SB 687 promotes equitable contract structures and reduces risk—especially in the public sector where governmental contracts historically imposed onerous indemnity obligations.
SB 783 (effective September 1, 2025)
Senate Bill 783 is a “cleanup” bill enabling the State Energy Conservation Office (SECO) to proceed with rulemaking to adopt more current energy and building standards, including the 2021 editions of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) and the International Residential Code energy chapter—potentially improving energy efficiency by 5–10% over the 2015 versions. It adds explicit statutory exceptions
allowing SECO or university boards of regents to adopt energy codes, water- and energy-saving design standards, and high-performance building benchmarks. Importantly, the bill requires economic-impact analyses before adoption— evaluating effects on housing affordability, construction costs, energy savings, and payback periods—aiming to ensure regulatory changes are economically justified and supportive of affordability. SECO must also engage in stakeholder processes and public notice before implementing updates. With large cities like Austin, Houston, Dallas, and San Antonio already moving forward with updated standards, SB 783 aligns statewide policy with metropolitan practices while building in transparency and cost assessment.
SB 929 (effective May 21, 2025)
Senate Bill 929 provides much-needed clarity and fairness in Texas lien law under Chapter 53 of the Property Code. It explicitly extends deadlines for filing lien notices and affidavits to the next business day if the cutoff falls on a weekend or legal holiday—protecting contractors, mechanics, and materialmen from losing rights due to timing quirks. The bill also clarifies that the inception date and priority of a lien are based on the date the lien affidavit is recorded— helping settle confusion over timing and priority conflicts. Its immediate effect upon Governor Abbott’s signature reduces litigation risk and strengthens lien rights for unpaid professionals. The Legislative Budget Board anticipates minimal fiscal impact, reflecting that SB 929 simplifies and codifies existing practices rather than introducing complex new regulations. In practice, this reform aligns lien law with broader statutory principles of deadline extension and helps construction professionals assert and preserve their claims more confidently.
SB 840 (effective September 1, 2025)
Senate Bill 840 represents a sweeping reform of municipal zoning authority in larger Texas cities—specifically those with populations over 150,000 in counties over 300,000 (e.g., Plano, Dallas, Houston). It mandates cities to permit mixeduse residential or multifamily developments—including conversions of commercial and warehouse structures—without requiring rezoning, variances, or other discretionary approvals. Municipalities are also restricted from imposing burdensome requirements such as traffic impact studies, extended utility upgrades, more than one parking space per unit, design criteria in excess of International Building Code standards, or impact fees. It limits enforcement of local restrictions on density,
height, setbacks, and parking—requiring allowance for the greater of existing residential densities or 36 units/acre, and height limits no lower than 45 feet. While historic district or industrial-adjacency exceptions remain, SB 840 facilitates “by-right” multifamily developments in commercial corridors, aiming to boost housing supply and affordability. The law forces cities to adjust comprehensive plans and development regulations—balancing growth management with urgently needed housing solutions in the state’s fastest-growing regions.
SB
841 (effective September 1, 2025)
Senate Bill 841 amends the Texas Construction Trust Fund Act to enhance protections and transparency in trust fund assignments under Texas Property Code Chapter 162. It reaffirms that artisans, laborers, mechanics, contractors, subcontractors, and materialmen—along with their qualified assignees—are beneficiaries of trust funds related to improvements on specific real property. The bill introduces enforceable assignment criteria: assignments must be written, occur only after the assignee pays the beneficiary in full, cannot be built into the original construction contract, and must be promptly notified (within seven days) to the property owner and contractor. This provision reverses prior legal reluctance and clarifies that second-tier subcontractors can transfer their trust fund rights—empowering general contractors or others to pursue claims when first-tier subcontractors fail to pay their subcontractors or suppliers. By outlining precise procedures for viable assignments, SB 841 improves accountability, reduces payment delays, and enhances the reliability of trust fund enforcement throughout the construction payment chain.
HB 2960 (effective September 1, 2025)
House Bill 2960 strengthens Texas construction contract law by making choice-of-law and choice-of-venue provisions void— as a matter of public policy—if they require application of another state’s law or jurisdiction for disputes tied to Texas-based projects. It amends Section 272.001 of the Business & Commerce Code, upgrading prior “voidable” language to an unequivocal ban on such clauses. The bill also harmonizes Section 15.020(d) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code to reflect this change and specifies that, where the offending provisions are void, litigation must proceed in the Texas county where the property is located—unless parties agree otherwise post-dispute. This reform aims to safeguard Texas contractors and stakeholders from being forced into unfamiliar or disadvantageous legal venues. By mandating litigation venue alignment with project location, HB 2960 reduces arbitration uncertainty and reinforces contractor access to local legal systems— supporting fairness and predictability in construction disputes.
These changes, although not an exhaustive list, represent many of the changes Texas made to its construction-related laws in the most recent legislative session. All those involved in the construction industry in Texas would do well to take heed of these changes. Well versed construction attorneys can help navigate these changes and their impact to the construction landscape.
By Tracy Card TCBA Sections & CLE Director
A Full Fall Array of Activities!
We’ve been lucky this year and seem to have avoided the long stretches of extreme heat. Fall is officially here; football is ramping up and everyone is preparing for their fall activities. The sections are buzzing with some wonderful workshops and CLE luncheons. The topics of discussion are helping everyone stay updated to date on the latest news and procedures within your area of practice. What a great time of the year to be part of the Association and your sections. We hope you will start getting out and taking advantage of these CLE courses. Be sure to check your section calendars or the TCBA calendar for more details. We look forward to seeing you there! g
TCBA members may submit announcements for the Bar Bulletin by emailing Elizabeth Banda, Communications Director, at elizabeth@tarrantbar.org.
TONER Home Performance is part of every case.
Performance
Expert Services: We support Lawyers and Attorneys by providing turn-key expert services for residential homes only We are Efficient, Economical, and Effective in this challenging segment
We do not charge for comprehensive case reviews, including conversations with your clients - Toner Kersting
Every Residential Case Starts with TONER Home
Professional Growth on Your Schedule
General CLEs
Annual Joint Meeting of Metroplex Inns - Hosted by Eldon B. Mahon Inn of Court CLE
Topic: Stevenson v. Johnson: The Disputed Election of 1948 and the Fort Worth Federal Case that Changed American History
CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members)
Foster Youth Grant Project - What It Can Do for Your Client
Speaker: Samuel Sanchez, Texas A&M University School of Law
CLE: 1 hour (FREE for TCBA Members)
OurFamilyWizard Presents: Implications of Technology and Social Media for Domestic Violence and Family Court Cases
Speaker: Lindsay Morris, OurFamilyWizard
CLE: 1 hour (FREE for TCBA Members)
The New Texas Business Court: A Primer on Structure, Jurisdiction, and Procedure
Speakers: Judge Jerry Bullard, Eighth Business Court Division
Judge Brian Stagner, Eighth Business Court Division
Moderator: Judge David L. Evans, Eighth Administrative Judicial Region
CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members)
Trial and Appellate Advocacy
Speakers: Derrick Boyd, Boyd, Powers & Williamson
Scott Lindsey, Boyd, Powers & Williamson
CLE: 1 hour (FREE for TCBA Members)
Section CLEs
Appellate Law Section
Topic: How Lawyers Can Uphold the Constitution & Rule of Law
Speaker: Dr. Bill Chriss, Chair of the Appellate Section of the State Bar of Texas
CLE: 1 hour ($40 for TCBA Members)
Business Litigation Section
Topic: Charting New Territory: Texas Business Courts’ First Year
Speakers: Judge Jerry Bullard, Eighth Business Court Division
Judge Brian Stagner, Eighth Business Court Division
Moderator: Judge Chris Taylor, 48th District Court
CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)
Construction Law Section
Topic: Truth or Tech – Navigating AI Generated Evidence in the Courtroom
Speaker: Beth Silverman, ArcherHall
CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)
Topic: Design Professional Contract Negotiations
Speaker: James Pruden, Freese and Nichols, Inc.
CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)
Topic: Change Order Reviews: Validity & Reasonableness
Speaker: Akshaya Iyer, Peritia Partners
CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)
Topic: Private Equity in the Real Estate Development and Construction Industries
Speaker: Benton Wheatley, Duane Morris LLP
CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)
Topic: Preventing Design Professional Malpractice
Speaker: James Pruden, Waddell Serafino Geary Rechner
Jenevin, PC
CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)
Energy Law Section
Topic: Navigating Safe Harbor: The Texas Division Order Statute
Speaker: Megan Knell, Steptoe & Johnson, PLLC
CLE: 1 hour ($40 for TCBA Members)
Topic: Produced Water in Texas: A Fluid Frontier
Speaker: Kyle Weldon, James D. Bradbury, PLLC
CLE: 1 hour ($40 for TCBA Members)
Topic: Getting Paid in the Oilpatch: Oil & Gas Mineral Liens & Chapter 67 Production Proceeds Letters
Speaker: Brent R. Doré, Doré Rothberg Law, P.C.
CLE: 1 hour ($40 for TCBA Members)
Fort Worth Business & Estate Section
Topic: Creative Income Tax Strategies
Speaker: Marvin E. Blum, Founder and Managing Partner, The Blum Firm. P.C.
CLE: 1 hour (FREE for Section Members)
Topic: Planning Update for 2025
Speaker: Alan L. Stroud, Senior Vice President / Wealth
Strategies Advisor, Bank of America Private Bank
CLE: 1 hour (FREE for Section Members)
Topic: 2025 Hot Topics in Estate Planning Seminar
Speakers: Mike Bourland, Bourland Wall & Wenzel, P.C.
John Porter, Baker Botts LLP
Lee Schwemer, Current Lecturer - UTA
Steve Akers, Bessemer Trust, Dallas
CLE: 1 hour (FREE for Section Members)
Intellectual Property Law Section
Topic: Trade Secret – Litigation in Federal Court
Speaker: Chris Granaghan, Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC
CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members)
Women Attorneys Section
Topic: Spotting Potential Tax Issues for Lawyers
Speaker: Monika Hengesbach, CEO, Decision Financial Services, Inc.
Topic: Session 3 – When You’re Not Okay to Practice
Speaker: Lara Bubalo Manor, Filuent
CLE: 1 hour Ethics (FREE for TCBA Members) g
Tarrant County Bar Association
LAWYER REFERRAL & INFORMATION SERVICE
The Lawyer Referral & Information Service (LRIS) is a service of the Tarrant County Bar Association that benefits both TCBA member attorneys and the public.
Panels
by Numbers*
Family Law 1107 Referrals
Consumer 822 Referrals
Probate 429 Referrals
Personal Injury
212 Referrals
Labor/ Employment 216 Referrals
Civil 842 Referrals
Landlord/ Tenant 616 Referrals
Criminal 365 Referrals
Real Estate 268 Referrals
Insurance 226 Referrals
Approved by the American Bar Association, LRIS allows member attorneys to receive client referrals and build their business, while helping callers quickly find an attorney in the area of law they need. The program is intended to help individuals who are able to pay normal attorney fees but have difficulty finding legal representation due to lack of experience with the legal system, lack of information about needed services, or fear of costs.
The LRIS is pleased to announce that Andrew W. Seibert has earned the title of Top Referral Attorney for TCBA’s Lawyer Referral & Information Service for the period from July 1, 2025, to present. Through his dedicated participation in the program, Seibert earned $40,700!
Why Join LRIS?
• Maximize Your Earnings: Like Andrew, you can earn substantial rewards by offering quality referrals.
• Grow Your Practice: Connect with clients in need of your expertise and grow your client base.
• Build Your Reputation: Build valuable relationships and be recognized for your exceptional service.
*Time Frame: August 2024–August 2025
For more details about joining LRIS, please visit www.tarrantbar.org/JoinLRIS or reach out to us at lris@tarrantbar.org.
TEXAS LAWYERS FOR TEXAS VETERANS
By Sarah Hall Hoffman, Pro Bono Programs Director
TARRANT COUNTY CHAPTER
UPCOMING TLTV
CLINIC
October 17, 2025
We are conducting this clinic via phone consultations from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Interested in volunteering? Email sarah@tarrantbar.org.
Passionate about helping veterans? Join the TLTV committee, meeting the third Wednesday of each month, 12–1 p.m. Email sarah@tarrantbar.org for details. g Consider
Thank You to Our Volunteers Who Assisted With Recent Clinics
Brittany Allen-Brantley
Scott Conyers
John Corbin
Wendy Hart
John Johnson
Samantha Kehl
Deborah Krane
Angelia Megahan
George Muckleroy
Brenda Pfieff
Emily Teel
Dwight Tom
George William Lockwood
1949–2025
BIN MEMORIAM
ill was born in Bremerton, Washington and was brought to Fort Worth at an early age. His Lockwood ancestors were from Bremerton, and prior to that, Missouri. He was raised in west Fort Worth by Edward and Ana (Moss). He graduated from Arlington Heights High School and studied physics at Texas A&M University. He began a master’s degree in physics before switching to law school at the University of Texas at Austin.
He was a JAG officer (lawyer) in the U.S. Marine Corps, and served in Okinawa, Japan and Washington, D.C. After an honorable discharge, he obtained an MBA from Texas Christian University.
He worked in the legal department at General Dynamics, practiced law with Johnson and Rothfelder in Fort Worth, and later maintained a solo practice specializing in Social Security disability.
For years he volunteered to provide legal services through the Tarrant County Bar clinic for veterans and the divorce clinic with the Black Women Lawyers organization. Both personally and professionally, he prioritized honesty, ethics, and morality.
He retired to his maternal grandfather’s farm between Hico and Carlton, in Hamilton County, in the area where his Moss and King ancestors had lived for generations. He had a small herd of Hereford cattle. He collected books and enjoyed discussing history, economics, politics, personality types, and psychotherapy.
He was a member of First Methodist Church of Fort Worth, the Tarrant County Bar Association, the Southside Masonic Lodge, the Fort Worth Elks Lodge, and MENSA.
A lifelong bachelor, he is survived by a brother and three nephews. His ashes are interred at the Central Texas State Veterans Cemetery in Killeen, Texas. Published by Harvest Hill Funeral Home. g
Rowland David Broiles
1938–2025
Rowland David Broiles, a Fort Worth attorney whose landmark U.S. Supreme Court case helped open the legal profession to non-citizens and whose quiet generosity changed numerous lives, died August 3, 2025, at the age of 87.
Born in Fort Worth on February 23, 1938, David was remembered as a steadfast advocate for justice and a source of support for those striving to build better lives. His generosity often went unseen, yet it enabled people to earn degrees, start careers, buy their first homes, or regain stability in hard times. Many continued to draw strength from his belief in their potential long after the moment of need had passed.
David began his professional life in academia, earning a PhD in Philosophy from Ohio State University and teaching at the University of Georgia while attending its law school. His commitment to principle emerged early: he lost his teaching position after burning a Confederate flag during a classroom discussion on Confederate Memorial Day. Completing his law degree at Yale, he began defending First Amendment rights, with his first jury trial involving demonstrators’ free speech.
His most celebrated legal victory came in 1973, when he served as co-counsel—and lead oral advocate—in the U.S. Supreme Court case In re Griffiths. In a 7–2 decision, the Court struck down Connecticut's citizenship requirement for bar admission, opening the legal profession to qualified non-citizens and setting a precedent for other licensed professions. The ruling became a cornerstone in the fight for immigrant civil rights.
Over the decades, David earned a reputation for fierce advocacy and principled counsel, culminating in the Tarrant County Bar Association’s prestigious Blackstone Award in 2006, honoring his career-long commitment to ethical ideals, courage, and service to the profession.
Even into his 80s, David continued to advise on ongoing cases, offering sharp insight and mentorship to colleagues who valued both his legal acumen and dedication to justice. Once described by peers as a “stemwinding trial attorney”—a nod to 44 www.tarrantbar.org ▪ SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2025
his commanding, persuasive presence in the courtroom—he brought the same energy to his counsel long after leaving daily practice.
With his wife, Patty, David traveled widely, riding the Trans-Siberian Express across Russia and exploring the whole of India. These adventures reflected the same openness and engagement that marked his life.
David is survived by Patty Broiles, his wife of 37 years; their children, Jim Broiles, Karin Cagle, Lisa Hoopaw, Paula Knowles, and Kathy Steinberg; eleven grandchildren; and eight great-grandchildren. Published by Star-Telegram from Aug. 19 to Aug. 24, 2025. g
Robert Jenkins Garrett
1944–2025
Robert Jenkins Garrett, or “Jenks” as he was known to most, passed away peacefully at home in Weatherford, Texas, on August 1, 2025, following a loving and prayerful week surrounded by his family and close friends, and bringing an end to his long and noble fight against cancer. Jenks was born on October 6, 1944, in Orange, Texas. He enjoyed life outdoors as a Texas kid. He was forever molded by his childhood summers spent in Jayton, Texas, with his Granny and Grandad, where he rode his horse, soaked up the stories of the old cowboys at the Stamford Reunion, and got into all kinds of mischief. Even as a young boy, he was passionate about fast cars and racing. His grandad, always young at heart, encouraged this and built him his first "race car" out of old lawn mower parts. Jenks grew up primarily in Itasca, Texas, where he proudly wore No. 17 as the Wampus Cats’ quarterback (and the trombone player at halftime), and served as Class President in 1963. Jenks was fiercely loyal and protective of his three sisters, Betty, Trisha, and Lindy. This prepared him to be the best girl dad and grandad!
Jenks received his undergraduate degree in 1967 from the University of Texas in Austin. He served as the president of the McCombs College of Business Administration Council in 1966 and 1967, and was a member of the Student Union Faculty, Campus Affairs Committee, Amateur Radio Society, and a touch football team. While at UT, Jenks worked for Texas Senator J.P. Word, who inspired him to attend Baylor Law School. In 1969, while at Baylor and during the Vietnam era, Jenks took time away from classes to serve in the Army Reserves.
Following his graduation from Baylor Law School in 1970, Jenks moved to Tarrant County and began his practice as a trial lawyer. In 1978, he became certified as a specialist in Personal Injury Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. Over the decades, Jenks had a legendary career representing plaintiffs against manufacturers and distributors of tobacco, pharmaceuticals, vehicles, and other products, in addition to medical malpractice claims. He and his wife, Denise, ran the Law Office of Jenks Garrett together for nearly 40 years. Jenks served as President of the Arlington Bar Association and President of the Tarrant County Trial Lawyers Association. He was an active member of the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA), and the Texas Trial Lawyers Association (TTLA). In 2012, he was honored with the H.D. Wells Outstanding Trial Lawyer Award from the Tarrant County Bar Association.
Jenks was a faithful Christian who dedicated much of his time to the Methodist Church, including many years on the Board of Trustees in Granbury, Texas; teaching the Disciple Bible Study class and other Sunday school classes; and serving on the Board for the Methodist Mission Home. Jenks also served his community for many years through the Boys & Girls Club of Arlington. Jenks had several passions and interests. He was a ham radio operator (call sign K5YNZ) who collected many interesting pieces of equipment but, more importantly, many very special friends through this community over the years. Jenks also loved F1 car racing, having been an amateur race car driver in his younger days and traveling around the world to enjoy the sport. Jenks was an avid, lifelong fan of Texas Longhorns football who enjoyed being one of the first fans to arrive early in the morning for the Red River Rivalry. He also loved family gatherings and celebrations, especially the large annual party at Christmas. Jenks loved to travel and was blessed to visit a wide array of destinations in his lifetime. He made a point of enjoying a beverage at an Irish pub in every city he could! And last but certainly not least, Jenks loved mowing the ranch into park-like perfection on his John Deere tractor.
Jenks is survived by his wife Denise Garrett; his daughters and sons-in-law, Lisa and David Farhat, Amanda and Scott Taylor, and Kate Garrett; and his two granddaughters, Georgia Ree and Charlotte Ray Farhat. Jenks is also survived by his sisters and brother-in-law, Trisha Dumas, and Lindy and Stan Sewell, and many beloved nieces and nephews. He was preceded in death by his mother and father, Virginia and Wilson Garrett, and by his sister and brother-in-law, Betty and Richard Vilven. Published by Star-Telegram from Aug. 5 to Aug. 6, 2025. g
Ronald David Weaver
1950–2025
RIN MEMORIAM
onald David Weaver, 74, passed away on August 16, 2025, in Arlington, Texas, from complications related to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s disease). Born on November 8, 1950, in Waco, Texas, David was the son of Sam Olen Weaver, Sr., and Zona Lucille Weaver. He grew up in Waco and attended local public schools. A devoted reader and lifelong Texas Rangers fan, he began his professional journey as a reporter for the Waco Tribune-Herald. Driven by a passion for helping people, David returned to Baylor University and earned his J.D. summa cum laude in 1983. He went on to build a respected legal career focused on canonical law and consumer bankruptcy. He was known for his tireless work and dedication in the case between the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth and the Episcopal Church. David was preceded in death by his parents; his niece, Lygina Jade Andrews; and his sister-in-law, Micah Weaver. He is survived by his daughters: Dena G. Weaver and her partner, Shellie Smith of Lubbock; Erin Sutton and husband Michael of Arlington; and Erica Clowers and husband Freddy of Arlington. He also leaves behind six grandchildren, two brothers, a niece, two nephews, and several great-nieces and great-nephews. Published by Star-Telegram from Aug. 19 to Aug. 22, 2025. g
John Young Bonds, III
1957–2025
John Young Bonds III, 68, passed away in Houston, TX, on September 2, 2025, surrounded by his children after a prolonged journey with progressive supranuclear palsy. John was born September 1, 1957, in Pine Bluff, AR. He grew up with his younger twin brothers, Mike and Ken, in Little Rock, AR, attending Catholic High School. He graduated from the University of Arkansas with degrees in Spanish, Latin American Studies, and Political Science, and from the University of Houston with a law degree. He began his legal career at Shannon, Gracey, Ratliff, and Miller in Fort Worth, TX, where he called home for more than 35 years. He was active in the legal community, an avid tennis player, and a prolific walker often seen traversing the River Crest Golf Course in the early mornings. He was an enthusiastic traveler (despite his distaste for flying), golfer, chef, and sports fan (particularly of the Razorbacks). He later founded Bonds, Ellis, Eppich, Schafer, Jones in Fort Worth and retired in 2019.
John is survived by his children, John (Christine), Nancy (Will), and Laura; his grandchildren, Caroline, Jack, Quinn, and Theresa; and his brothers, Mike (Cindy) and Ken. Published by A Sacred Choice. g
Member Benefits Vendor List
TCBA members may take advantage of discounts provided by the following vendors:
AMO Office Supply guarantees the lowest prices on office supplies for TCBA members, with next-day delivery and free shipping. Call 800.420.6421.
For the last 17 years EVERNET Consulting has been established in the legal industry, growing nationwide to support law firms across the country. Our wide range of services include email, network, and computer support, as well as practice management solutions. Our expertise also extends to website development, marketing, social media management, online reviews, and new client outreach. Contact us today and receive a discount on our services: https://evernetco.com/lp/tarrant-county-form/.
Falcon Document Solutions provides quick, efficient, and reliable process services, document scanning, printing, copying, electronic discovery, litigation displays, and trial boards. They are available 24/7 at 817.870.0330 or visit their website at www.falcondocs.com. TCBA members can enjoy discounts on their services.
Fort Worth JSB Co., Inc. offers a 10% discount for TCBA members on printed materials — business cards, letterhead, envelopes, business forms, brochures, flyers, and more. To receive a quote, call 817.577.0572.
Fort Worth Zoo offers discounted tickets for TCBA members. $18.00 for adult tickets, $14 for child or senior tickets. For more information, please contact Tracy Card at tracy@tarrantbar.org or call 817.338.4092.
Thomson Reuters Exclusive TCBA offer of 15% off new Westlaw subscriptions or upgrades to current subscriptions*, including our latest AI enhanced platform, Westlaw Edge. Please contact your local Account Executive, Ben Galloway, for more information: Ben.Galloway@TR.com. *Restrictions apply, please contact your AE for details.
For IT Help:
Juris Fabrilis provides members with discounted rates on web-based tools to assist in managing their law practices. For more information, call 817.481.1573 ext. 101.
For Shredding and Document Disposal:
Magic Shred is a secure shredding business that offers TCBA members a 10% discount to TCBA members. They provide on-site document shredding services. TCBA also organizes 4 free shredding events per year exclusively for its members. Members can bring up to five boxes for shredding free of charge. Call 940.783.6580 for details. g
Bar Bulletin ▪ September/October 2025
Tarrant County Bar Association 1315 Calhoun Street Fort Worth, TX 76102-6504 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED
If any of your contact information is incorrect, please submit the corrected information to the TCBA office at 817.338.4092, or email tcba@tarrantbar.org
Looking for ways you can support TLTV but unable to volunteer?
CONSIDER SPONSORING A REMOTE OR IN-PERSON CLINIC!
Your sponsorship would play a crucial role in helping us continue to provide valuable services and support to those in need.
Contact sarah@tarrantbar.org to learn how you can make a difference.
