by Michelle Moya
As we count down the days until our 10th annual Court of Appeals visit at SHSU, we had the opportunity to hear the 9th Court of Appeals in Conroe! Typically based in Beaumont, the court traveled to hear oral arguments for two appeal cases. Given the distinct jurisdictions and caseloads of the 9th and 10th Courts of Appeals, Pre-Law President Olivia, newly elected Pre-Law Secretary Laila, and I took it upon ourselves to hear different perspectives in the courts!
As we approached the James Keeshan Courthouse, we noticed a car license plate in the parking lot, with a message that might it somewhat unsurprising that its owner was needing to park in court.
But with time running short, we moved with dispatch to the courtroom, noting that the attorneys were set up and readying themselves for court.
Similar to our own 10th Court of Appeals, there was a three-judge panel presiding: Chief Justice Scott Golemon, Justice Leanne Johnson, and Justice Jay Wright for the first case. The first case was Siluria LLC v. Lummus Technology, LLC, and it centered around a complex contract-construction issue. Attorney Rusty Sewell delivered a 15-minute oral argument on behalf of Siluria, followed by Attorney Thomas Kruse’s argument for Lummus. The crux of the argument revolved around the interpretation of a phrase in the party’s Escrow Agreement: “begun removing the demonstration unit.” What’s interesting is that both parties agreed on the facts, but they had differing interpretations of the agreement, which they both claimed was clear-cut. It was interesting to see how every word truly does count in law–and also seeing what a “hot panel” looks like.
After a brief recess, the second case began: City of Houston v. Festival Props., Inc. To our surprise, the appellant was the City of Houston, represented by attorney Donald Hightower, while the appellee was Festival Properties, Inc., represented by Attorney Marie D. Harlan. It centered around a claim of inverse condemnation against the City of Houston, alleging a loss of access to property. Watching the proceedings, it was interesting seeing the pointed questions, pushing the attorneys to think and respond thoughtfully. Despite the attorneys’ well-reasoned responses, the justices’ questions underscored the complexity of the issues at hand.
For those of us aspiring to enter the legal profession, this experience reinforced the importance of thinking critically under pressure. It was interesting to see firsthand the challenges of presenting complex arguments, thinking on your feet, and navigating the intricacies of the law.
The hearings were not only interesting for their content, but also as networking opportunity. We met Ms. Deborah Concepcion, who is a Managing Attorney at Lone Star Legal Aid, and she told us a bit about her career, her passion for helping others, and some of the ins and outs of court room appearances. We also met Zachary Dickens, who was in the Pre-Law Society as an undergraduate before going to law school, and he now works at Polk County as a prosecutor.
As we get closer to the 10th Court of Appeals visit, I am even more eagerly anticipating their upcoming visit. I’m excited to see new people, learn more about life in law, and see the cases that the 10th Court of Appeals will bring to SHSU.
Center for Law, Engagement, and Politics 