Fiduciary Advice & Counsel
Fiduciaries have unique responsibilities beyond administering and managing the funds in a trust or estate. This privileged role requires that the fiduciary remain impartial and follow meticulous standards while also maintaining a positive relationship and effective communication with beneficiaries. Despite a fiduciary’s best efforts to meet these standards and discharge their duties well, the fact is that where there is significant wealth, conflict is more likely to take root.
Jackson Walker Trusts & Estates attorneys counsel personal representatives, trustees, agents under powers of attorney, and guardians on the specifics of administration, including minimizing taxes, what qualifies as a prudent investment, and distributing assets as appropriate. We also advise fiduciaries generally on how to optimally carry out their duties, avoid litigation, and resolve disputes. Jackson Walker attorneys regularly guide individual and corporate fiduciaries about the best practices to avoid allegations of self-dealing or other breaches of fiduciary duty.
Our experienced Litigation, Tax, and Trusts & Estates attorneys work together to represent fiduciary clients in disputes about control of family businesses, will contests, guardianship matters, breach of fiduciary duty cases, and other litigation associated with the administration of estates, trusts, powers of attorney and guardianships. We also represent individual and corporate fiduciaries embroiled in IRS disputes.
Kathleen Tanner Beduze and Jocelyn Slater to Speak at TexasBarCLE’s Advanced Elder Law & Guardianship Courses
Jackson Walker partner Kathleen Tanner Beduze and senior counsel Jocelyn Slater will be featured presenters at the 26th Annual Advanced Elder Law & Advanced Guardianship Law Courses. This event, organized by TexasBarCLE, is scheduled for April 16-17, 2026 at the Westin Dallas Park Central in Dallas, Texas.
Speaking Engagements • March 26, 2026
Texas Business Court Enforces Noncompete—But Rejects Trade Secret and Nonsolicitation Claims
By Chris Bankler
In Galderma Laboratories, L.P. v. Brenner, Cause No. 26-BC08B-0003 (Tex. Bus. Ct., Mar. 12, 2026), Judge Stagner addressed a familiar scenario in business litigation: a senior executive leaves and immediately joins a direct competitor.
Insights • March 20, 2026
Texas Business Court Finds Jurisdiction Over Employee-Raid Case Based on Managerial-Official Allegations and Intellectual-Property Nexus
By Chris Bankler
In Alamo Title Company v. WFG National Title Company of Texas, LLC, the Texas Business Court denied a motion to remand and held that the dispute fell within the court’s jurisdiction under Chapter 25A. The opinion offers a detailed discussion of the Texas Business Court’s topical jurisdiction provisions, concluding that the lawsuit satisfied the statute through two independent pathways.
Insights • March 20, 2026
Texas Business Court Confirms Arbitration Award and Emphasizes Limited Judicial Review
By Chris Bankler
The Texas Business Court continues to develop its role in resolving disputes arising out of arbitration proceedings. In BNSF Railway Co. v. Level 3 Communications, LLC, Judge Bouressa denied an application to vacate an arbitration award and granted a counter-application to confirm the award following a bench trial.
Insights • March 11, 2026
Texas Business Court Clarifies Pleading Standards for Responsible Third Parties
By Chris Bankler
This opinion is a useful guide for trial lawyers litigating responsible third party (RTP) designations under Chapter 33. Judge Whitehill draws an important distinction between liability and responsibility, clarifies the meaning of “harm” in § 33.011(6), and explains what a motion must plead to satisfy Texas’s notice-pleading standard.
Insights • February 24, 2026
Texas Business Court Rejects LLC Membership Claim, Finds Oral Partnership Indefinite, and Bars Claims on Limitations
By Chris Bankler
In a Rule 166 opinion, Judge Andrea K. Bouressa resolved core business-law issues as a matter of law: LLC membership under the Texas Business Organizations Code, definiteness of an alleged oral partnership, and limitations on fraud and unjust-enrichment claims. The Court entered partial judgment before trial.
Insights • February 24, 2026
Texas Business Court Enforces Punitive-Damages Waiver and Clarifies Post-Resignation Trustee Duties
By Chris Bankler
In Preston Hollow Capital, LLC v. Truist Bank, Cause No. 25-BC01B-0030, the Texas Business Court issued a detailed opinion addressing three recurring issues in sophisticated financing disputes: (1) whether the parties’ contract that barred punitive damages was enforceable, (2) whether such a waiver in one transaction document applies across a multi-document financing, and (3) what fiduciary duties—if any—survive a trustee’s resignation.
Insights • January 21, 2026
Texas Supreme Court Reinforces Limits on Individual Shareholder Claims
By Chris Bankler
The Texas Supreme Court issued a significant clarification on when shareholders may sue individually rather than derivatively for breach of fiduciary duty. In its opinion issued on November 14, 2025, in In re UMTH General Services, L.P., the Texas Supreme Court resoundingly rejected efforts by shareholders to transform fiduciary duties owed to the company into individual shareholder claims for breach of fiduciary duty.
Insights • November 18, 2025
Texas Business Court Tightens the Discovery Rule: Inquiry Notice Starts the Clock in Fraud Cases
By Chris Bankler
The Texas Business Court is quickly establishing itself as a venue where commercial sophistication is both expected and enforced. In Riverside Strategic Capital Fund I v. CLG Investments, Judge Bill Whitehill granted summary judgment for the defendants and held that Riverside’s fraud claims were time-barred.
Insights • October 21, 2025
