CBM Engineers, Inc. v. Tellepsen Builders, L.P., 403 S.W.3d 339

Tellepsen sued CBM Engineers for negligence, breach of contract, and breach of warranty over the Camp Allen project.
CBM moved to dismiss under Chapter 150’s certificate-of-merit requirements.
The trial court dismissed the negligence claim but denied the contract and warranty claims; both sides appealed.
All claims arise from CBM’s provision of design/engineering services and thus fall under Chapter 150 per the Occupations Code.
The court held the 2005 version of Chapter 150 applies to all claims and the Aduddell affidavit satisfied the certificate-of-merit requirement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does Chapter 150 apply to all claims?	Tellepsen argues only negligence falls under 150’s certificate requirement.	CBM argues only negligence is subject to 150.	All claims are subject to Chapter 150.
Is the certificate of merit sufficient?	Aduddell’s affidavit provides a factual basis for alleged errors.	Affidavit is too conclusory and lacks specific negligent acts.	Yes, the certificate of merit is sufficient.

Curtis & Windham Architects, Inc. v. Williams, 315 S.W.3d 102 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010) (held 150.002 applies only to negligent claims when appropriate; Curtis & Windham distinguished on scope of professional-services claims)
TDIndustries, Inc. v. Rivera, 339 S.W.3d 749 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011) (defines 'practice of engineering' and scope of professional-services claims)
Criterium-Farrell Eng’rs v. Owens, 248 S.W.3d 395 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2008) (relates to the certificate-of-merit requirements and sufficiency of claims)
M-E Eng’rs, Inc. v. City of Temple, 365 S.W.3d 497 (Tex. App.—Austin 2012) (holds the certificate must provide factual basis for professional errors or omissions)
Carter & Burgess v. Sardari, 355 S.W.3d 804 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011) (discusses appellate review of certificate-of-merit determinations)