Cooke v. Karlseng, No. 19-0829

CourtSupreme Court of Texas
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM.
Citation615 S.W.3d 911
Docket NumberNo. 19-0829
Decision Date22 January 2021
Parties H. Jonathan COOKE, Individually and on Behalf of Escrow Partners Dallas, L.P.; Escrow Partners Dallas, GP, Inc.; Escrow Partners Houston, L.P.; Escrow Partners Houston, GP, Inc.; Escrow Partners Austin, L.P.; Escrow Partners Austin, GP, Inc.; Escrow Partners San Antonio, L.P.; Escrow Partners San Antonio, GP, Inc.; Title Partners, L.L.P.; North American Management, L.L.P.; TJ Partners I, LLC ; and TJ Partners II, LLC, Petitioners, v. Robert C. KARLSENG; Karlseng Law Firm, P.C. ; Ashley Brigham Patten; Patten & Karlseng Law Firm, P.C.; Jacques Yves LeBlanc; and LeBlanc, Patten and Karlseng Law Firm, P.C., Respondents

615 S.W.3d 911

H. Jonathan COOKE, Individually and on Behalf of Escrow Partners Dallas, L.P.; Escrow Partners Dallas, GP, Inc.; Escrow Partners Houston, L.P.; Escrow Partners Houston, GP, Inc.; Escrow Partners Austin, L.P.; Escrow Partners Austin, GP, Inc.; Escrow Partners San Antonio, L.P.; Escrow Partners San Antonio, GP, Inc.; Title Partners, L.L.P.; North American Management, L.L.P.; TJ Partners I, LLC ; and TJ Partners II, LLC, Petitioners,
v.
Robert C. KARLSENG; Karlseng Law Firm, P.C. ; Ashley Brigham Patten; Patten & Karlseng Law Firm, P.C.; Jacques Yves LeBlanc; and LeBlanc, Patten and Karlseng Law Firm, P.C., Respondents

No. 19-0829

Supreme Court of Texas.

OPINION DELIVERED: January 22, 2021


David B. Conrad, Michael A. Vincent, Ricardo J. Bonilla, Scott Cashion Thomas, Fish & Richardson P.C., Geoffrey Scott Harper, Katrina G. Eash, Winston & Strawn LLP, Dallas, for Petitioners.

Ashley Brigham Patten, Patten Law Firm, P.C., Houston, Susan Lea Hays, Law Office of Susan Hays, P.C., Austin, C. Gregory Shamoun, Kenneth J. Lambert, Shamoun & Norman, LLP, Farmers Branch, for Respondents Ashley Brigham Patten, Patten & Karlseng Law Firm, P.C., n/k/a Patten Law Firm, P.C.

Susan Lea Hays, Law Office of Susan Hays, P.C., Austin, C. Gregory Shamoun, Kenneth J. Lambert, Shamoun & Norman, LLP, Farmers Branch, Ross Howard Parker, Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr, P.C., Dallas, for Respondent Jacques Yves LeBlanc.

Susan Lea Hays, Law Office of Susan Hays, P.C., Austin, Brian Keith Norman, C. Gregory Shamoun, Kenneth J. Lambert, Shamoun & Norman, LLP, Farmers Branch, for Respondents Robert C. Karlseng, Karlseng Law Firm, P.C., Patten LeBlanc, and Karlseng Law Firm, P.C., n/k/a LeBlanc & Karlseng, P.C.

PER CURIAM

615 S.W.3d 912

A central issue in this case is whether the court of appeals erred in holding that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over claims of a limited partner for harm done to the partnership because he lacked standing to bring those claims individually. Because the court of appeals' decision is inconsistent with our recent opinion in Pike v. Texas EMC Management, LLC , 610 S.W.3d 763 (Tex. 2020), we conclude the appeal should be reconsidered in light of that opinion. We therefore reverse the court of appeals' judgment and remand for further proceedings.

H. Jonathan Cooke formed multiple real estate related partnerships with Robert Karlseng, Ashley Brigham Patten, and Jacques Yves LeBlanc. In 2006, Cooke sued Karlseng, Patten, and LeBlanc, along with new business entities they had formed without him (collectively, the defendants). He alleged that the individual defendants moved partnership assets to the new business entities without compensating him. The parties went to arbitration and the trial court affirmed an award in Cooke's favor. The court of appeals vacated the award and remanded the case for further proceedings. Karlseng v. Cooke , 346 S.W.3d 85, 100 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011, no pet.).

Over...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • Moser v. Dillon Invs., LLC, 05-21-00204-CV
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • August 2, 2022
    ...jurisdiction where none existed. Cooke v. Karlseng , 617 S.W.3d 570, 578 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2019) ( Cooke I ), rev'd on other grounds , 615 S.W.3d 911 (Tex. 2021) (per curiam). Thus, if the trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the original petition, it cannot toll limitations ......
  • Cooke v. Karlseng, 05-18-00206-CV
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • April 12, 2022
    ...opinion should be reconsidered in light of that opinion; it reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings. Cooke v. Karlseng, 615 S.W.3d 911, 912 (Tex. 2021). On remand, we conclude that the trial court correctly denied cross-appellants' plea to the jurisdiction and their motion fo......
2 cases
  • Moser v. Dillon Invs., LLC, 05-21-00204-CV
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • August 2, 2022
    ...jurisdiction where none existed. Cooke v. Karlseng , 617 S.W.3d 570, 578 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2019) ( Cooke I ), rev'd on other grounds , 615 S.W.3d 911 (Tex. 2021) (per curiam). Thus, if the trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the original petition, it cannot toll limitations ......
  • Cooke v. Karlseng, 05-18-00206-CV
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • April 12, 2022
    ...opinion should be reconsidered in light of that opinion; it reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings. Cooke v. Karlseng, 615 S.W.3d 911, 912 (Tex. 2021). On remand, we conclude that the trial court correctly denied cross-appellants' plea to the jurisdiction and their motion fo......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT