Phil Ferrant v. Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, L.L.P., 05-19-01552-CV

Michael Cramer moved to Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, L.L.P. (LBBS) in August 2012; Ferrant signed a Letter of Understanding on August 13, 2012, approving transfer of his files and approved hourly rates.
LBBS provided legal services on four matters (IOF, Graham, Sisk, BOA) and billed $202,401.41; Ferrant paid $102,000 and left a balance of $100,401.41.
LBBS sued Ferrant on March 19, 2015, to collect unpaid fees; the case was tried to a jury in August 2019 with Ferrant appearing pro se.
LBBS introduced the Letter of Understanding, invoices, A/R reports, emails, and corporate‑representative testimony; Ferrant testified he paid some sums, disputed certain charges and credits, and conceded he expected to pay for work Cramer performed.
The jury found an hourly-fee agreement existed, Ferrant breached it, and owed $100,401.41; the jury also awarded $50,000 in attorney’s fees for work through trial.
On appeal Ferrant challenged (1) legal sufficiency of evidence that a contract existed and (2) sufficiency of evidence supporting the attorney’s‑fee award; the court affirmed on contract and reversed/remanded on fees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Ferrant)	Defendant's Argument (LBBS)	Held
Existence of contract	No direct evidence of an agreement; finding requires impermissible stacking of inferences	Letter of Understanding, conduct (payments, approvals, invoices), and emails show an hourly-fee agreement	Affirmed — evidence (LOU, payments, invoices, testimony) legally sufficient to support agreement
Attorney’s fee award for prosecuting suit	Fee award lacks required detail; LBBS failed to show specific tasks, who performed them, and time spent per Rohrmoos	Corporate rep testified total hours, staffing breakdown, rates, and general tasks performed (petition, discovery, trial prep)	Reversed and remanded — Rohrmoos requires detail about tasks/time; LBBS’s testimony was too general and unsupported by contemporaneous records

City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (legal‑sufficiency review standard for jury findings)
Rohrmoos Venture v. UTSW DVA Healthcare, LLP, 578 S.W.3d 469 (Tex. 2019) (attorney‑fee awards require evidence of particular tasks, who performed them, when, time spent, and reasonable rates)
City of Fort Worth v. Zimlich, 29 S.W.3d 62 (Tex. 2000) (review evidence in light of jury charge/instruction)
Jelinek v. Casas, 328 S.W.3d 526 (Tex. 2010) (courts defer to jury credibility determinations)
Levetz v. Sutton, 404 S.W.3d 798 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2013) (elements required for contract formation)
Webb v. Crawley, 590 S.W.3d 570 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2019) (attorney may recover unpaid hourly fees under contract principles)