In an interesting case in which a pro se party won a rare victory in an appellate court, the Dallas Court of Appeals issued an opinion on November 3, 2022 determining that the appellee attorney had not met his burden of proof in a motion for summary judgment he filed in the trial court, thus obviating any need for the non-movant pro se party to respond. For that reason, the trial court decision granting that motion for summary judgment was reversed and the case remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

This case presents a cautionary tale implicating the importance of clear communications up-front when entering into an attorney-client relationship as well as clearly defining the fee arrangements in writing.  

Rwad the full opinion by clicking here: Kam v. Adams

Comments are closed.