Yale, Weaver & Phillips

A Lawyer Sent You A Letter – Now What? Call Your Lawyer.

2026-05-15T17:10:26Z

What is a demand letter?

If someone believes that you have violated a contract or violated certain civil areas of law, that person must send you a demand letter notifying you of such position before the initiate a lawsuit. The length of time between the letter being sent and the lawsuit being filed depends on the type of claim. For example, the Texas Deceptive Trade Practice Act (DTPA) requires that written notice be sent to the future defendant at least sixty (60) days before a lawsuit is filed. Very broadly speaking, this letter will tell you (1) what action you have taken that they believe was wrong; (2) how the other side has been damaged by your actions; (3) a demand that you stop acting in that manner; and (4) a demand for return property in some form or fashion, or payment of funds to the complaining party - aka the future plaintiff. Most importantly, the letter will usually direct you to respond confirming certain information and/or explaining why you did what you did. It is very important that you do not respond to this letter yourself.

First Things First: Call Your Lawyer

If you are receiving a demand letter of this nature, there has already been a meeting between the folks who want to sue you and their lawyer to determine whether they have a reasonable basis to pursue a lawsuit against you. This would have involved reviewing documents, gathering facts, and calculating damages to determine whether or not it is worth it to send the demand letter in the first place. Note: this does not mean the future plaintiff and lawyer are right about what you did or the resulting claims they are threatening. It just means they collectively decided it was worth the time and expense of initiating the legal process against you. Do not try to respond to this letter yourself. You do not know the elements or factors relating to the claims being made against you. You do not know evidentiary standards to understand (a) whether what is stated in the letter can actually be used in Court, or (b) what facts/documents you can use to defend yourself. You do not know what land mines you are falling on by making a basic statement in writing. AI generators and ChatGPT cannot help you here, do not even try it. Leave this to the lawyer who knows how to make a case and defend a case of this nature. The lawyer will know what information to reveal and what to hold for use later, and how to phrase things or protect things in writing so they are not used against you later. A phone app or computer bot cannot gauge the proper law for the proper state while considering all facts and circumstances. General online research cannot do this, either.

What Next?

Put together timelines and information for the initial meeting with your lawyer. Do not under any circumstance delete emails, pictures, text messages, or anything else relating to the claims at issue in the letter. With forensic experts and technology breadcrumbs, you will regret trying to hide the data that you think may hurt your case. Be honest about these things with your attorney. If your attorney knows about a problematic email or text, the attorney can prepare for how it will be used and prepare you for questions about it. If not, and this shows up during a hearing, your attorney and you will be left stranded. Review the letter and take notes on what is and is not accurate. Do not upload the letter to an app or website, and ask AI to evaluate this for you. Again, this is not going to help you. Furthermore, a lot of these platforms are not private or protected by privilege. The person who wants to sue you can send a discovery request during the lawsuit to see everything you put into chat, including emails or memos it prepared for you.

Last Thought

The internet and AI generated responses make it seem like you have the tools to respond to an attorney on your own. While wanting to be informed is great, you need to be careful - you are dabbling in something that a lawyer has been doing for years, if not decades. What you put on paper can and will be used against you. To bring in more caution, avoid phone calls from the lawyer as well and tell them you are seeking legal counsel of your own. Texas law allows for recording of conversations, even if the lawyer does not tell you they are recording (subject to debt collector rules). Contacting a lawyer does not guarantee that you can avoid the threats in the letter you received, but it does ensure you do not accidentally or inadvertently make things much harder on yourself thereafter. Should you find yourself reading a demand letter, cease and desist letter, notice of breach, etc., contact the attorneys at Yale, Weaver & Phillips immediately. Let our team handle the deadlines, the responses, the preparations, and all - 940-891-4800 ext. 4.

Yale, Weaver & Phillips Featured: Super Lawyers In Focus

2026-05-15T20:46:04Z

Have you picked up the latest issue of Texas Monthly?

It's a particularly special edition, if you ask us -

Weaver & Yale Awarded Over $200,000 in Attorney’s Fees at Trial & Court Grants $100,000 in Additional Sanctions Against Opposing Side – Second Court of Appeals Affirms

2025-09-02T14:51:47Z

Overview

In a suit initiated by vexatious homeowners, the team of Weaver, Phillips, & Yale managed to obtain dismissal of over 15 claims against their client--leaving only two claims against their client as well as their client's claim for breach of contract. Therein, the jury found in favor of the client of Weaver, Phillips, & Yale, and the jury further awarded $210,000 in attorney's fees as well as additional fees upon successful defense of appeals to the immediate court and the Texas Supreme Court. Moreover, the trial court found that opposing counsel acted in bad faith and abused the judicial process in a manner that, if tolerated, would breed disrespect for and threaten the integrity of the judicial system via wrongful tactics. As a result, the trial court awarded an additional $100,000 to client of Weaver, Phillips, & Yale, for which the homeowners and their lawyers and jointly and severally liable.

Challenges on Appeal

In challenging the findings by the jury and the trial court, the homeowners and their attorneys argued that attorney's fees could not be awarded as damages and that there was no basis for the sanctions, amongst other claims. With this, the homeowners claimed that the language of the contract at issue in the suit did not properly provide for indemnification, and that no other damages were sufficient to underly the award of attorneys fees. Likewise, the homeowners fought to show they had not acted improperly throughout the litigation process. The Second Court of Appeals - Fort Worth disagreed, pointing out:

The American Rule . . . prohibits the recovery of attorney's fees from a party in legal proceedings unless authorized by statute or contract, and here, the Waiver and Release Agreement completed by the homeowners when gaining access to neighborhood facilities included provisions for full indemnification of the neighborhood association for attorney's fees incurred in this matter;
When a trial court catalogues multiple instances of sanctionable conduct, the court of appeals will uphold the trial court's sanctions award if any of the sanctionable conduct in the order has support in the record--such as as false sworn statements to the court, statements asserted to mislead the court, arguments made while ignoring aspects of the record that are unfavorable to them, asserting arguments that are not based in law, and multiple duplicative filings of hundreds of pages of excessive exhibits.

Other attempts were made to pull apart the jury charge language and fee segregation, but these arguments also failed, as the team of Weaver, Phillips, and Yale ensured that all necessary language was included during the jury charge conference and all prerequisites to an award of attorneys fees were met. Opinion available at: Memorandum Opinion

Takeaways

In handling complex civil litigation, you need attorneys who understand all aspects of trial and appellate review. Every step of your case matters--from the first pleading, to discovery, pretrial advocacy, and preservation of error throughout the entire case. This case involved interlocutory appeals, multiple motions to reconsider, and other fights leading up to final trial. Because the attorneys and the trial court were so incredibly diligent in making a proper record and advocating heavily at each stage, the Court of Appeals was able to consider the case in full and uphold the proper results. It is terrifying the number of pitfalls that can wholly unravel a final judgment or award by a jury upon appeal, so make sure you have the right people on your side. Contact our attorneys today to see what options are available to you: 940-891-4800.

Seventh Court of Appeals Conditionally Grants Mandamus on Enforcement Order – Another Win for Weaver & Phillips

2025-08-29T16:10:22Z

Child Support Enforcements - Contempt Findings and Beyond

Under the Texas Family Code, an aggrieved parent can seek enforcement of a child support order requesting that the other parent be forced to pay delinquent amounts owed. In doing so, the aggrieved parent can ask that the Trial Court send the non-paying parent to jail for a specified period of time for the failure to abide by the child support order. While there are a handful of affirmative defenses against the contempt finding and potential incarceration, any parent who is not paying their child support and medical support obligations run major risks. These motions are not considered lightly by the state courts, and the pleadings must be clear as to each and every violation by date, amount, and provision of the order being violated. If an enforcement is filed against you, but the hearing does not occur until months later, the filing parent cannot seek a contempt finding for the months that passed without specifically amending or supplementing the motion already on file.

What Can and Cannot be Enforced by Contempt?

The Texas Constitution states that an individual cannot be incarcerated for nonpayment of a debt. Texas law makes certain exceptions to this rule for child support, medical support, and attorneys fees that are granted solely in an action for enforcement of child support and/or medical support. Attorney fees granted as part and parcel of a divorce or general suit affecting the parent-child relationship do not fall within this category of fees that are enforceable by contempt and jail time. But, what about a suit wherein Mother sought retroactive child support, and the jury awarded fees?

Conditional Mandamus Relief to Challenge an Enforcement

An order holding a parent in contempt can only be challenged by a habeas corpus proceeding or a mandamus proceeding. Here, Mother filed an enforcement against Father for non-payment of child support, medical support, support arrearages, and attorney's fees in the amount of $52,000 from a prior case that involved retroactive support. The attorney representing Mother (a former family law judge) asserted that the attorney's fees were ordered as payment in a child support proceeding--but that was not truly the case. Instead, a previous jury awarded Mother attorney fees in the overall case. The attorney representing Father in the enforcement proceeding at the trial level, however, did not raise this issue during the final hearing. As a result, the Trial Court held Father in contempt for nonpayment including the attorney's fees and Weaver was appointed as appellate counsel for Father. In seeking Mandamus review, Weaver argued that the attorney fees and missed support payments that were not specifically pled by Mother should be removed from the contempt order and that probation over Father for these penalties were a violation of Father's Constitutional rights. The Seventh Court of Appeals--sitting in place for the Second Court of Appeals after transfers of the case by the Texas Supreme Court were granted--agreed and granted the conditional mandamus request. The Trial Court has been ordered to vacate the contempt order, removing those provisions and releasing Father from the future threat of incarceration on those issues. Opinion available: Memorandum Opinion

Find Attorney's Who Understand Mandamus Petitions

A conditional grant of Mandamus relief is incredibly rare, with only 3-10% of petitions being granted each year. For example, the Texas Supreme Court survey for 2023 shows 209 of 217 petitions were denied. If you are needing emergent review of an action by a state court, you need an attorney with experience in these matters. Contact the attorneys at Yale, Weaver & Phillips before the deadlines run and your order cannot be challenged: 940-891-4800.

Weaver Secures Wife’s Award of 65% of Marital Estate PLUS Spousal Support on Appeal

2025-08-25T17:42:57Z

In an appeal to the Sixth Court of Appeals, Brittany A. Weaver and Kaitlyn E. Phillips fought to protect an award to their client (Wife) of 65% of the marital estate plus $2,500 in spousal per month for eight years. The Husband--contesting the Trial Court's rulings--argued that Wife did not establish the amount necessary to meet her minimum reasonable needs, and that the amount in spousal support exceeded the statutory guidelines compared to Husband's gross income.

"Minimum Reasonable Need"

Though referenced in the Texas Family Code, the phrase "minimum reasonable needs" is not defined. As such, the Trial Court is granted discretion to determine these needs on a case-by-case, fact specific basis. Exactitude is not required, which means that a spouse seeking support need not provide an itemized list of monthly income and expenses--this is just helpful for the trier of fact. While Wife received interests in real property of the marital estate and various accounts, Texas law does not require the spouse to spend down long-term assets, liquidate available assets, or incur new debt simply to obtain job skills and meet short-term needs. This factors were considered in conjunction with Wife's age, lack of ability to work, and sacrifices during the marriage--and Husband's extreme marital misconduct, resulted in confirmation that there was no abuse of discretion by the Trial Court.

Rebutting the Presumption that Maintenance is Not Warranted

The Texas Family Code presumes that spousal maintenance is not warranted unless the spouse seeking maintenance has exercised diligence in earning sufficient income to provide for her minimum reasonable needs, or developing the necessary skills to provide for minimum needs during separation and while the suit for dissolution is pending. Then, to qualify for maintenance and rebut the presumption, the spouse seeking maintenance should show:

each spouse's ability to provide for that spouse's minimum reasonable needs independently, considering the resources;
education and employment skills of the spouses, as well as time necessary to acquire sufficient education or training to enable the spouse to earn a sufficient income, and the availability/feasibility of education or training;
duration of marriage;
age, employment history, earning ability, and physical and emotional condition of the spouse seeking maintenance;
acts by either spouse resulting in excessive or abnormal expenditures--or destruction, concealment, or fraudulent disposition of community property, etc;
contribution by one spouse to the education, training, or increased earning capacity of the other spouse;
property brought to the marriage;
contribution of a spouse as a homemaker;
marital misconduct;
history or pattern of family violence;
mental or physical disability of the spouse seeking maintenance; or
another compelling impediment to earning sufficient income to provide for the spouse's minimum reasonable needs.

Need Help in Your Case?

Contact the attorneys at Yale, Weaver & Phillips to ensure your rights are being protected both at the trial level and on appeal.

Three Strikes, You’re Out: Enforcement of Possession and Access Rules in 2025

2025-06-30T16:14:29Z

Interference with Possession and Access Schedules, Generally

In Texas, the time and date of a parent's possession of their children is guided by an Order of the Court. This could be a Final Decree of Divorce or Final Order in Suit Affecting the Parent-Child Relationship in final cases, or Temporary Orders in ongoing custody suits. The type of possession shared by the parents can be anything from a standard schedule of 1st, 3rd, and 5th weekends with Thursdays and rotating holidays; week-on and week-off shared schedules; and more. Unfortunately, there are times that one parent refuses to follow the possession schedule that has been entered by their Judge--even when the schedule was agreed to in the first place. Then, the other parent must seek attorney and Court assistance to enforce the possession schedule, hoping he or she can recoup the missed visit with makeup time. But, inevitably, a parent incurs attorney fees and costs to get the time he or she already had to begin with.

Que: Motion for Enforcement

A motion for enforcement is a pleading that tells the Court: (1) an Order outlines specifically the possession schedule to be followed by the parents; (2) parent "A" is entitled to time with the children on a specific date and time; (3) parent "B" has failed or refused to turnover the children to parent "A" at that date and time; and (4) parent "A" has been harmed by missing time with the child(ren) and will continue to be harmed by this. Most people think of this type of action in conjunction with a failure to pay child support because Texas law provides for Writs and Turnover orders for immediate action to gain access to their children during their time (think TRO type action to get children back with you). Fairly, more often than not, a parent will seek attorney help and the children will be turned over before the Judge ever hears the arguments on the Enforcement, Writ, TRO, etc. With this, the Court misses the vital information: that one parent is not abiding by their orders, thinks they can play games when they feel like it, and this becoming a recurring problem. It is certainly understandable that a parent won't want to continue incurring attorney fees when the child is properly returned, but the legislature worked tirelessly in 2025 to change the law so these patterns do not continue.

Three Violations, Go to Jail

Starting September 1, 2025, the Texas Family Code will grant jail time as a punishment for a parent who has violated the possession and access provisions on at least three occasions. An award of attorney's fees to the parent who has been forced to file these motions over and over will be granted overall--making this a requirement, not a subjective thing up to the Judge. And even more important, make up time is to be ordered--and in instances of three or more violations, the parent gets 2-for-1 time. So, if you missed 7 days getting this issue to the Court, you are getting 14 days back. Moreover, the Court is then directed to consider modifying the possession and access schedule in the Order because the other parent cannot be relied upon to follow it, granting the other parent more time or changing other issues in the Order. Stated plainly, this is huge. But how do you make sure to prove this type of issue before a Judge to get this type of relief? First, document everything and let your attorney know of issues immediately. As soon as a visit is missed or delayed, email your attorney. Communicate with your spouse in writing about the fact that your visit started on this day and time and they failed to show. Ask them politely to abide by the Order in place. And when they do not, your attorney needs to file the motion for enforcement. Even if your spouse decides to return the children to avoid the hearing, make sure you go forward each time you can (we know this is an expense that is not easy to shoulder), so you are building the record your Judge needs to see this has hit the three-failure threshold. Depending on how courts handle the new language, it is possible that three violations can be raised in a single motion. However, this will be a brand new law and some jurists may not interpret the provisions of the statute that way, so it's always best to go ahead and file each time instead of waiting for violations to stack.

What To Do From Here?

Review the order in place in your case and know the schedule you should be following. If visitation has been problematic for you and your spouse in the past, put together a notebook where you keep your written discussions, school letters, and other matters that you can easily deliver to your attorney when the time comes. Brittany Weaver and Kaitlyn Phillips have attended sessions on these legislative updates to know the ins and outs of the new rules to add to their experience in family law cases in Denton County, Texas and the surrounding areas. Contact us today at 940-891-4800 for more information.

Business Judgment Rule Codified with Senate Bill 29 – and Changes to Fiduciary Duties

2025-06-12T16:35:37Z

The "business judgment rule" is a legal doctrine that shields directors and mangers from liability for rational decisions made for the benefit of a corporation. Even in a situation where a director or manager has caused harm to a corporation, there may be no violation of this rule where the decision was made in the honest exercise of business judgment. Where a minor shareholder feels a director or manager is acting in an oppressive manner, the rule can still protect the manager/director for decisions that do not harm the corporation overall. This rule comes into play when shareholders attempt to claim that a director/manager has breached a fiduciary duty--and in those situations, it is important to remember that a director owes a fiduciary duty to the corporation itself. This rule has been referenced time and time again in cases, but SB29 finally adds the rule to the Texas Business Organizations Code providing more guidance to attorneys and entities in what the "business judgment rule" expects or requires. Importantly, there is also now a rebuttable presumption that the directors of entities act in good faith and for the interest of the entity. To the extent there are still implications for fiduciary duties, the text of SB29 also asked that directors of certain entities have the ability to completely eliminate fiduciary duties owed via a properly drafted company agreement and governing documents. What does this mean? For those running corporations of these kinds, contact an attorney familiar with both business law and fiduciary duties to ensure you know exactly what you should and should not do (and why). The attorneys of Yale, Weaver & Phillips are here to help - contact us today.

Common Misconceptions about Probate and Trusts

2025-05-08T18:30:44Z

What are TikTok influencers and Instagram lawyers not telling you about probates and trusts?

Unfortunately, much of what is being share on social media platforms about wills, trusts, and probate is not accurate. Whether the person sharing the information is not familiar with Texas law, does not have a background in law, or otherwise shares information that only fits a very specific set of circumstances, we see more and more that people don't realize they have taken the wrong steps after it's too late to fix undo those steps. Before trusting a non-attorney or using online forms for your planning needs, we want to share some of the common misconceptions we see on a regular basis: "Everyone needs a trust, it keeps you out of probate." False. While trusts can be helpful to families who exceed the estate tax caps (meaning, you have tens of millions of dollars that will be passing at your death) or families that have special-needs beneficiaries, most people do not need a trust. A generic trust can actually lead to litigation upon someone's passing, and a poorly written trust will absolutely leave a family in peril--and trusts are not guaranteed to keep the estate out of probate. Many times, trusts are sold to blended families as a way to ensure some kind of fairness for step-siblings, but this is not always correct. If the children do not have a solid relationship with their stepparent, then there will likely be litigation upon the passing of the first parent. Suddenly, a stepchild wants to micromanage every cent used by the stepparent, as the stepchild becomes more concerned about his or her inheritance than the ability of the stepparent to live out their days. Or, a stepparent who suddenly decides their biological children should be receiving more from the trust than a stepchild starts issuing distributions that leads to unfairness and litigation.

- - -

"Probate is horribly expensive and takes forever." False. If you plan now with an attorney drafting a proper Last Will & Testament, that includes valid self-proving affidavits, then you can almost guarantee a quick turn around from filing the application to probate the Will with appointment of an Independent Executor. Where does probate of a will or administration of an intestate (no will) estate become tricky? If the Will doesn't have all required language, proper witnesses on the self-proving affidavit, or is contradictory, there will be more hurdles. If your loved one dies without a Will, all potential heirs must agree to an independent administration; an independent administration may not be allowed if there are minor beneficiaries; if a party challenges the executor named in the Will as a bad actor.

- - -

"Doing your own will online is easy." False. Not only do online form builders fail to stay up to date with changes in Texas law, the questions can be confusing and prompts can be vague. People inadvertently disinherit their spouses because they presume the spouse automatically takes--and this is not the case. Other times, people give away more than 100% of their estate, and a contest is created as to who gets what. Or, someone starts giving away personal items during their lifetimes that were listed to go to someone else in the Will. If your Will transfers assets to a trust upon your death, did you make sure to fund the trust prior to your death?

- - -

"You can leave everything to a trust using beneficiary designations to avoid probate." Potentially. If you create AND fund a trust during your lifetime, then you have some ability to name that trust as your pay-on-death beneficiary for certain types of accounts. But beware: if you do not do this exactly right, the trust designation will be ignored, and the funds will have to be handled through a probate estate. If you thought you had done this correctly so didn't think a Will was needed, your loved ones are facing a situation of having to open a probate/administration and determining heirs, where the account funds will be split based upon the heirship determination. Where does this get challenging? Say you wanted two particular people to receive life insurance.

- - -

"You don't have much, you don't need a Will." False. Everyone should have a Will. You never know what issues could arise when you pass away and do not want to leave your loved ones scrambling to put together pieces of your life. Many financial institutions will not accept things like affidavits of heirship, small estate affidavits, or even a muniment of title to release funds, so money will have to be paid to get the money released.

- - -

"Payable-on-death accounts are 100% protected." Not always. Texas allows for specific debts to take priority over a payable on death beneficiary. For example, child support arrearages reduced to a judgment before someone's passing can cause funds from a POD account to be brought into an Estate to satisfy the judgment.

- - -

Be careful what you read and how you proceed. Click the link below to fill out our Estate Plan Questionnaire Today. Our estate packets (will, power of attorney, medical power of attorney, and living will) can be prepared and signed in days!

https://www.yalelawgroup.com/estate-planning-contact-firm/

Wills, Powers of Attorney, and More – Quickly – Fill Out Our Estate Plan Questionnaire to Start

2025-04-29T14:46:17Z

Estate Plan Packets Offered By Our Team

Sometimes, reaching out to a lawyer to get your Last Will and Testament started is the hardest part. Thinking about your death is not easy, but taking this step is the best thing you can do for your loved ones. Believe it or not, there is peace of mind in certainty in knowing you have done all that you can to make sure you have put your last wishes down on paper. This gives the people, charities, and associations your want to provide for after your passing clear direction beyond the generosity of what they are to receive from you. If not, they may be faced with filing for a determination of heirship, limited to a dependent administration (court overview of every step), and additional costs. And should you pass away leaving young children, you can also specify who you would like the courts to consider in taking care of your children.

Our Estate Plan packets include your Last Will and Testament along with Living Wills, a Durable Power of Attorney, and Medical Power of Attorney. Depending on the specifics of your family or finances, something like a trust or special needs planning could also be beneficial. Or what if something happens where you are alive but you cannot make decisions for yourself? You never know what may happen, but completing these documents provide you an added layer of protection.

You can start this process by completing the Estate Plan Questionnaire on our Website. Your information will be sent directly to our attorneys who fill contact you about our pricing, how quickly we can turn around your plan given the specifics of what you are looking for, and let you know of other options. Some plans can be prepared, reviewed by you, and signed via ceremony in our office within a week! To jump to this form, click here: Estate Plan Form

If you're still unsure about the process, please feel free to fill out the general contact form and/or call our office to get a conference scheduled. There are times you need our strong litigants in the courtroom. But when planning for hard times and uncertain times you and your loved ones might face in the future, your team of Roger Yale, Brittany Weaver, and Kaitlyn Phillips want this process to be as comfortable and reassuring as possible.

Second Court of Appeals Sides with Weaver & Sets Standard on Verified Denials

2025-04-24T02:40:05Z

By an Opinion delivered on April 17, 2025, the Second Court of Appeals - Fort Worth set its standard for verified denials under Rule 93 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure: Memorandum Opinion Background: At the trial court level, a verified denial was filed within an answer to a counterclaim, asserting that the opposing party did not have capacity to seek relief for claims in the Texas lawsuit due to the opposing party's failure to register as a foreign entity doing business in the State of Texas. During a hearing on various motions, the foreign entity argued it was not required to register with the Secretary of State in Texas, citing law of another state and the rules of agency. The trial court did not dismiss the entity from the suit at that time and the issue was addressed again at final trial. Therein, the corporate representatives for the entity testified the entity still had not registered with the Texas Secretary of State because they believed such action was not required. The trial court determined the entity lacked capacity due to its failure to register and entered a take-nothing judgment on the entity's claims asserted via the entity's principal agent. Issue on Appeal: Rule 93 states that a pleading setting up certain matters must be verified by the complaining party. This includes a challenge to a party's legal capacity to sue or other defect in the parties. By filing a verified pleading challenging something like a party's capacity, that party's capacity is then controverted. To overcome this, the challenged party bears the burden of proving at trial that the challenged party is entitled to recover in its respective capacity. A number of courts in Texas have expanded the standard for capacity challenges resulting from a failure to maintain registration with the Secretary of State, holding that the party asserting the defect must file a verified plea in abatement or otherwise seek abatement of the case to allow time for the defect with the Secretary of State to be fixed. Moreover, those courts held that a failure to seek abatement in a verified pleading would waive the issue of defective capacity on appeal. Until April 2025, the Second Court of Appeals - Fort Worth had not taken a stance on this issue. Result: A properly filed verified denial in an answer shifts the burden to the challenged party, requiring the challenged party to show it can in fact recover in the lawsuit. Here, the Court of Appeals - Fort Worth determined that abatement of the suit was not the proper remedy and the parities were not required to seek abatement to preserve the issue of capacity on appeal. The Texas Business Organizations Code states that a foreign entity must register with the Secretary of State in order to conduct business in the State of Texas and to file suit in the State of Texas relating to such business activity--subject to certain exceptions. This rule likewise prevents an agent or representative of the foreign entity from asserting claims of the entity in the State of Texas where the entity is not properly registered. Accordingly, the Second Court of Appeals - Fort Worth respectfully disagreed with other courts in Texas, holding that Rule 93 was clear in what was expected of litigants on these issues. Brittany Weaver and Kaitlyn Phillips not only argued this issue successfully at trial, but also protected the result on appeal and managed to obtain a result that clarified a murky issue for all litigants handling cases in this district. If you are facing a civil lawsuit and want legal representation that looks at your case from all aspects without backing down from tough issues, contact Yale, Weaver & Phillips.