Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Laurie Ann McRay, et al. v. Dow Golub Remels & Gilbreath PLLC
Paid petition · Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, No. 01-21-00032-CV · judgment December 29, 2022
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
When a law firm sues its own clients, demanding an award for both alleged past-due attorney’s fees and then attorney’s fees for prosecuting the lawsuit against its clients, are the clients’ Due Process rights violated when the sued clients:
-
were denied the ability to retain substitute counsel, as well as adequate time for newlyretained counsel to prepare for the upcoming trial;
-
were denied the ability to present evidence, including expert testimony, defending against the law firm’s accusations and in support of the clients’ counterclaims; and
-
were ultimately ordered to compensate the law firm for “prosecutorial attorney’s fees” that were never paid by the law firm but were instead complimentarily provided by the law firm’s legal malpractice carrier, resulting in a windfall to the suing law firm?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Kimberly S. Keller
Keller Stolarczyk, PLLC
For respondent
Robert Paul Debelak
McDowell Hetherington LLP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences
Proceedings
- Jun 03 2024Rehearing DENIED.
- May 14 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/30/2024.
- Apr 24 2024Petition for Rehearing filed.
- Apr 01 2024Petition DENIED.
- Mar 12 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/28/2024.
- Feb 29 2024Waiver of right of respondent Dow Golub Remels & Gilbreath PLLC to respond filed.
- Jan 24 2024Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 29, 2024)