Susan E. Harriman v. Leslie Hyman and Pulman, Cappuccio & Pullen, LLP

Summary

The Texas Court of Appeals for the Second District affirmed summary judgment against Susan E. Harriman in her legal malpractice action against Leslie Hyman and Pulman, Cappuccio & Pullen, LLP. The court held that Harriman failed to produce more than a scintilla of evidence that the appellees’ alleged conduct proximately caused her claimed damages. The court therefore did not reach the alternative limitations ground for traditional summary judgment.

Holdings

1. No-evidence summary judgment was proper because Harriman offered only speculation, conjecture, and vague conclusory assertions that the appellees' conduct caused the denial of the motion to unseal, an unfavorable settlement, or damages.
2. The court did not need to analyze the traditional summary-judgment grounds because Harriman failed to produce more than a scintilla of evidence under the no-evidence standard.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court properly granted no-evidence summary judgment on Harriman's legal-malpractice claim because she failed to produce more than a scintilla of evidence that the appellees' conduct proximately caused her alleged damages.
2. Whether the court needed to reach the appellees' traditional summary-judgment grounds after affirming on the no-evidence grounds.

Disposition

affirmed