Gulf Coast International, L.L.C. v. the Research Corporation of the University of Hawaii
01-15-00625-CV
| Tex. App. | Dec 11, 2015Background
- Appellee The Research Corporation of the University of Hawai‘i (RCUH) obtained an order granting its special appearance in Harris County; Gulf Coast International, L.L.C. (GCI) appeals.
- Central factual dispute: GCI contends the vessel KOK is a commercial vessel and relies on Van Vleit’s affidavit that 90% of RCUH’s contacts with GCI were in Houston; RCUH argues the trial-record contains evidence contradicting that affidavit.
- GCI’s reply cited multiple authorities and invoked federal evidentiary burden-shifting principles for personal-jurisdiction proof; RCUH argues those federal procedural rules do not apply in Texas state-court special-appearance practice.
- RCUH contends several arguments and authorities GCI raised in its reply were not in GCI’s appellant brief and therefore were waived.
- RCUH argues Jack B. Anglin (a summary-judgment evidentiary standard) is inapplicable to special appearances and reiterates that contrary evidence existed in the trial court record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (GCI) | Defendant's Argument (RCUH) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard of proof on special appearance | Court must accept uncontroverted allegations/affidavits and resolve conflicts in plaintiff’s favor (citing federal burden-shifting cases) | Texas state special-appearance procedure does not adopt federal procedural burden-shifting; state practice governs | Court should not apply federal burden-shifting; state standards control (RCUH urged affirmance) |
| Competency/self-serving nature of Van Vleit’s affidavit | Van Vleit’s testimony is direct, unequivocal, and unchallenged — should be accepted as true | RCUH says record contains contradictory evidence and attacks reliance on self-serving affidavit; disputes were presented to trial court | Court to consider the contradictory record evidence; RCUH argues affidavit is contested and not dispositive |
| Applicability of Jack B. Anglin (summary-judgment rule that uncontroverted affidavit must be taken as true) | GCI relied on Jack B. Anglin to require accepting uncontroverted affidavit evidence | RCUH: Jack B. Anglin governs summary judgment, not special appearances; in any event, there was contrary evidence in the record | Jack B. Anglin is inapplicable to special appearance procedural posture; RCUH’s point favors affirmance |
| Waiver of new arguments raised in reply brief | GCI treats new procedural/standard arguments in its reply as part of appellate record | RCUH: arguments introduced first in reply brief are waived under Texas appellate practice | Court ordinarily will disregard issues raised first in a reply brief; RCUH urged waiver and affirmance |
Key Cases Cited
- Jack B. Anglin Co. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266 (Tex. 1992) (summary-judgment rule that uncontroverted affidavit evidence must be accepted as true)
- Bullion v. Gillespie, 895 F.2d 213 (5th Cir. 1990) (federal practice accepting plaintiff’s allegations on special-appearance-type review)
- WesternGeco L.L.C. v. Ion Geophysical Corp., 776 F. Supp. 2d 342 (S.D. Tex. 2011) (applied federal burden-shifting on prima facie jurisdictional showing)
- Clark v. Noyes, 871 S.W.2d 508 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1994) (federal procedural rules on jurisdictional proof not adopted in Texas state practice)
- Schlobohm v. Schapiro, 784 S.W.2d 355 (Tex. 1990) (Texas uses federal due-process minimum-contacts standard but not federal procedural rules)
- Touradji v. Beach Capital P’ship, L.P., 316 S.W.3d 15 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010) (accept allegations in petition when reviewing jurisdictional pleadings)
- N.P. v. Methodist Hosp., 190 S.W.3d 217 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006) (issues raised first in reply brief are ordinarily waived)
- P.V.F., Inc. v. Pro Metals, Inc., 60 S.W.3d 320 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2001) (case cited by GCI at trial; RCUH contends it does not support GCI’s position)