HOUSTON (Legal Newsline) - A Texas law firm lost its fight to dismiss a competitor’s lawsuit over fees from a wrongful death settlement it negotiated after a car accident claimed the life of an 18-year-old exotic dancer whose parents accused her employer of allowing her to drive home while intoxicated.
Terry & Thweat sued The Buzbee Law Firm in 2019 to recover its share of the fees from the settlement that Jade James and her ex-husband, John Luengas, won from the Splendor Gentleman’s Club. They sued the club after their daughter Alanna was hit and killed by a drunk driver, claiming the club was to blame because she had been drinking too.
After the settlement was reached, Terry & Thweatt accused Buzbee of tortious interference for convincing James to renounce a contract she had signed with it and switch to the Buzbee firm. Terry & Thweatt said it was owed hundreds of thousands of dollars under a 40% contingency-fee contract.
In an attempt to end the dispute, Buzbee filed an arbitration proceeding against Terry & Thweatt in which he was ordered to pay the other firm $5,000. Terry & Thweatt rejected that as too low, while James and Luengas filed grievances against Terry & Thweatt and a lawsuit seeking declaratory judgment that he didn’t owe the firm any money.
Buzbee next tried to have the case dismissed under the Texas Citizens Participation Act, an anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) law designed to protect citizens against lawsuits over comments about matters of public interest. A trial judge denied the motion without explanation, and Buzbee filed an interlocutory appeal.
The Houston firm fared no better before the First District Court of Appeals, which rejected his motion in a decision by Justice April L. Farris.
Recounting the facts of the case, the appeals court said James and Luengas met with Terry & Thweatt in October 2017, but the firm refused to represent them after Luengas said he was represented by another lawyer. Partner Lee Thweatt reconsidered after a second meeting at which Luengas said that he had terminated his attorney-client relationship with the other lawyer. James signed a contingency fee agreement with Terry & Thweatt, only to terminate it the following day.
Terry & Thweatt warned James she could be liable for double fees if she won a settlement with a different lawyer but several days later Buzbee sued the gentleman’s club on her behalf. The case settled in July 2019, and the next day Buzbee offered Terry & Thweatt a share of the fee well below 40%. Terry & Thweatt rejected the offer and threatened suit.
In its motion to dismiss, Buzbee said he should be protected by TCPA because he was being sued over communications with his client. The appeals court rejected that argument, saying Buzbee was sued over commercial speech, which is excluded from the law. TCPA has an exception for speech involving “a commercial transaction in which the intended audience is an actual or potential buyer or customer.”
“We conclude that Terry & Thweatt’s tortious interference claim is factually based on Buzbee’s alleged promise to James, made at their initial meeting on October 13, 2017, that his law firm would personally pay any fees that James owed to Terry & Thweatt,” the appeals court said.
Buzbee also argued the exception only applies to commercial transactions between plaintiff and defendant. But nothing in the law so limits the exception, the appeals court ruled. The court didn’t get to any of Buzbee’s arguments because it ruled the commercial speech exception applied.