Advocating for you before the highest courts in the land.

Advocating for you before the highest courts in the land.

Lloyd Gosselink’s Appellate Practice Group arises from the solid foundation of the firm’s core subject matter practices and its strong and diverse court litigation and agency-advocacy practice. In many cases, the firm’s attorneys know the legal issues and law relating to our clients’ cases because they helped make that law in the Courts of Appeal and the Texas Supreme Court. Our appellate attorneys have experience not only with a wide array of subject matter, including water law, environmental law and litigation, governmental immunity, utility ratemaking, bond validation suits, and takings law, but also uncommon procedural mechanisms, such as appellate court injunctions and direct appeals to the Texas Supreme Court.

Importantly, the firm’s extensive administrative practice has provided our attorneys with significant experience in the unique arena of administrative appeals of agency actions in the district courts of Travis County, as well as subsequent appeals of those opinions all the way to the Texas Supreme Court. Members of the Appellate Practice Group are admitted to practice in every Texas appellate court and the Texas Supreme Court, as well as the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court, equipping them to handle appeals from the entire region.

We know that appeals are usually won or lost on legal issues as opposed to disputed facts, so Lloyd Gosselink’s appellate attorneys routinely work as an integral part of the client’s team to develop a strong legal record at the trial court and agency level. As a result, our litigation and appellate advocacy teams are complementary, with our trial and administrative attorneys working hand-in-hand with our appellate attorneys to adeptly develop a sound legal record, a team effort that continues through the appellate process.

The Firm’s Appellate Practice Group is not limited to working on cases originating from within the Firm. Our skilled appellate advocates are frequently engaged to handle appeals in cases tried by other firms, and to file amicus briefs on behalf of important industry and advocacy groups. Our appellate attorneys are thoughtful strategists, meticulous brief-writers, and zealous, effective oral advocates.

Often, a case is not won until a court of appeals has spoken. Our Appellate Practice Group is dedicated to the task of convincing courts to say the right thing when they speak.

Representative Appellate Cases

Tex. v. New Mex., 462 U.S. 554 103 S. Ct. 2558, 77 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1983)

URI, Inc. v. Kleberg Cty., 543 S.W.3d 755 (Tex. 2018)

City of Richardson v. Oncor Elec. Delivery Co., LLC, 539 S.W.3d 252 (Tex. 2018)

Oncor Elec. Delivery Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm’n of Tex., 507 S.W.3d 706 (Tex. 2017)

Zachry Constr. Corp. v. Port of Houston Auth. of Harris Cty., 449 S.W.3d 98 (Tex. 2014)

Atmos Energy Corp. v. Cities of Allen, 353 S.W.3d 156, 157 (Tex. 2011)

Rolling Plains Groundwater Conserv. Dist. v. City of Aspermont, 353 S.W.3d 756  (Tex. 2011)

Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n v. Yeo, 171 S.W.3d 863 (Tex. 2005)

In re Tex. Natural Resource Conserv. Comm’n, 85 S.W.3d 201 (Tex. 2002)

N.A.A.C.P. v. City of Kyle, Tex., 626 F.3d 233 (5th Cir. 2010)

Doe v. St. Stephen’s Episcopal Sch., 382 Fed. Appx. 386 (5th Cir. 2010)

AEP Tex. N. Co. v. Tex. Indus. Energy Consumers, 473 F.3d 581 (5th Cir. 2006)

Fisher v. Pub. Util. Comm’n of Tex., No. 03-16-00540-CV, 2018 WL 454730 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 11, 2018, no pet.)

W. Travis Cty. Pub. Util. Agency v. Travis Cty. Mun. Util. Dist. No. 12, 357 S.W.3d 549 (Tex. App.—Austin 2017, pet. denied)

City of Dallas v. Sabine River Auth. of Tex., No. 03-15-00371-CV, 2017 WL 2536882 (Tex. App.—Austin June 7, 2017, no pet.)

Chisholm Trail SUD Stakeholders Grp. v. Chisholm Trail Special Util. Dist., No. 03-16-00214-CV, 2017 WL 2062258 (Tex. App.—Austin May 11, 2017, pet. denied)

Upper Trinity Reg’l Water Dist. v. Nat’l Wildlife Fed’n, 514 S.W.3d 855 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, no pet.), reh’g denied (Mar. 30, 2017)

R.E. Janes Gravel Co. v. Tex. Comm’n on Envtl. Quality, 522 S.W.3d 506 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, pet. denied)

City of Dallas v. Abney, No. 09-16-00038-CV, 2016 WL 3197591 (Tex. App.—Beaumont June 9, 2016, no pet.)

Kleberg Cty. v. URI, Inc., 540 S.W.3d 597 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2016), rev’d, No. 16-0336, 2018 WL 1440148 (Tex. Mar. 23, 2018)

B.C. v. Steak N Shake Operations, Inc., 461 S.W.3d 928 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2015), rev’d, 512 S.W.3d 276 (Tex. 2017)

Guadalupe-Blanco River Auth. v. Tex. Attorney Gen., No. 03-14-00393-CV, 2015 WL 868871 (Tex. App.—Austin Feb. 26, 2015, pet. denied)

Save Our Springs All., Inc. v. City of Kyle, 03-13-00271-CV, 2014 WL 1432090, (Tex. App.—Austin Apr. 10, 2014, no pet.)

City of Seguin v. Lower Colo. River Auth., No. 03-13-00165-CV, 2014 WL 258847 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 15, 2014, pet. dism’d)

Lower Colo. River Auth. v. City of Boerne, Tex., 422 S.W.3d 60 (Tex. App.—San Antonio, 2014, pet. dism’d)

Concho River Basin Water Conservancy Ass’n v. Tex. Comm’n on Envtl. Quality, No. 07-12-00302-CV, 2013 WL 6254910 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2013, pet. denied)

City of Georgetown v. Lower Colo. River Auth., 413 S.W.3d 803 (Tex. App.—2013, pet. dism’d)

Northeast Neighbors Coal. v. Tex. Comm’n on Envtl. Quality, No. 03-11-00277-CV, 2013 WL 1315078 (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 28, 2013, pet. denied)

Parrot-Ice Drink Prods. of Am., Ltd. v. K & G Stores, Inc., No. 14-09-00008-CV, 2010 WL 1236322 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Mar. 30, 2010, no pet.)

Healthcare Cable Sys., Inc. v. Good Shepherd Hosp., Inc., 180 S.W.3d 787 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2005, no pet.)

City of Garland vs. Pub. Util. Comm’n of Tex., 165 S.W.3d 814 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005, pet. denied)

Sign Up for Newsletter Updates

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: . You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact