Jackson Walker partner Joshua Romero
was quoted extensively in a recent Law360
article about the potential rise in complex appeals as a result of the Texas Supreme Court's ruling in In re Toyota, which enabled appellate courts to substantively examine the reasons behind a trial judge's decision to grant a new trial.
The September 3, 2013, article, titled "Toyota Ruling Will Yield Glut of Texas Appeals, Experts Say," focuses on the high court's ruling in favor of Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc. in a case involving a rollover accident. Specifically, the court held that the El Paso Court of Appeals could review the reasoning behind a trial judge's decision to throw out a verdict in favor of Toyota and grant a new trial.
Mr. Romero said that the decision would probably increase the burden on appellate courts to carefully examine new trial orders. It would also make it more difficult for trial courts and lawyers seeking to overturn a jury verdict.
"The ruling is really a game changer," Mr. Romero told the publication. "It takes away from the natural tendency of the courts, when viewing the entire trial, to simply change a jury verdict to comport with what they think the results of the case should have been."
At the same time, Mr. Romero stressed that the ruling puts the proper emphasis on the importance of jury verdicts. "My personal view is that juries get it right most of the time," he said.
To read the full article (subscription required), CLICK HERE
Mr. Romero represents both plaintiffs and defendants in state and federal courts in complex commercial litigation, bad–faith insurance claims, qui tam and whistleblower actions, and construction litigation. He was recently named a Super Lawyer–Rising Star by Thomson Reuters, an honor bestowed on less than 2.5% of Texas lawyers. Mr. Romero received his B.S., cum laude
, from Stephen F. Austin State University and his J.D., cum laude
, from Northwestern University School of Law. After law school, he clerked for both the Texas Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.