Issuu

President...................................Marvina

President-Elect..............................John

Vice

Secretary-Treasurer...........................Joe

Directors

Director.....................................Robert

Members of the 2025-2026 100 Club

*List Reflected Below is as of February 6, 2026

Adams, Lynch & Loftin, P.C

Albert, Neely & Kuhlmann, LLP

Anderson, Cummings & Drawhorn

Anderson & Riddle, LLP

Baker Monroe Huston, PLLC

Barlow Garsek & Simon, LLP

Blaies & Hightower, L.L.P.

Bonds Ellis Eppich Schafer Jones, LLP

Bourland, Wall & Wenzel, P.C.

Brackett & Ellis, P.C.

Brown, Proctor, Peck & Piwetz, LLP

Bruner & Bruner, PC

City of Fort Worth – City Attorney’s Office

Cook Children’s Health Care System

– Legal Department

Curnutt & Hafer, LLP

Decker Jones, P.C.

Dismuke & Waters, P.C.

Factor, Campbell & Baker

Freeman Mills PC

Friedman, Suder & Cooke, P.C.

Gardner Smith & Vaughan, PLLC

Griffith, Jay, & Michel, LLP

Harris, Finley & Bogle, P.C.

Harrison Steck, P.C.

Haynes and Boone, LLP

Holland Johns & Penny LLP

Jackson Walker LLP

Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP

Killen & Dennis, PC

KoonsFuller, P.C.

Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP

Law Offices of Paup, Shutt & Associates, P.C.

Lively & Associates, PLLC

McDonald Sanders, P.C.

Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr, P.C.

Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee, PLLC

Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC

Noteboom – The Law Firm

Padfield & Stout, LLP

Patterson Law Group

Pham Harrison, LLP

Phelps Dunbar LLP

Pope, Hardwicke, Christie, Schell, Kelly & Taplett, L.L.P.

Robbins Travis PLLC

Robert Huseman Law PLLC

Ross & Matthews, P.C.

Second Court of Appeals

Stephens Law Firm, PLLC

Stoy Law Group, PLLC

Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office

Taylor, Olson, Adkins, Sralla & Elam, LLP

The Blum Firm, P.C.

The Colaneri Firm, P.C.

Underwood Law Firm, P.C.

Varghese Summersett PLLC

Vartabedian Hester & Haynes LLP

Watson, Caraway, Luningham, Bradley & Trammell, LLP

Whitaker Chalk Swindle & Schwartz PLLC

Whitley Penn, LLP

Wick Phillips

Wieser Taylor PLLC

Winstead PC

To be eligible for the 100 Club, any law firm, government agency, law school, or corporate legal department with four or more members must attain 100% TCBA membership compliance for the 2025–2026 bar year. This qualifies them for the “100 Club.” The firms/ organizations listed above have already paid their membership dues and qualify for 100 Club membership

for the new bar year. Any firm/organization that qualifies in the future will have its name published in every issue of the The Verdict for this bar year. TCBA takes pride in the participation of these law firms and other groups. The new bar year began on July 1. If you have not paid your renewal invoice, please contact Tiffany Myles at tiffany@tarrantbar.org. g

PRESIDENT'S PAGE

MARVINA ROBINSON 2025–2026 TCBA President

Inside Bench Bar: Why It Still Matters After 31 Years

Marvina: For someone who has never attended Bench Bar, how would you describe it?

Karmen: It is a very interactive, learning, fun environment that you don't see in many other places.

Marvina: What makes Bench Bar different from a typical CLE conference?

Karmen: It’s not boring. You’re not just sitting in a conference room being cold and not enjoying yourself. You enjoy yourself and learn something.

Marvina: This is the 31st year of Bench Bar in Tarrant County. Why do you think Bench Bar still matters in 2026?

Karmen: Because the bench is ever-changing, and we’re always getting new lawyers in town. So the thought of them interacting with each other is always going to be available. I’ve been in Tarrant County all those 31 years, and there are judges sitting on the bench right this second that I will have to get to know because they’re newer. So I think that’s beneficial for both older lawyers and the new ones coming in.

Marvina: Okay, let’s take a little bit of time to talk about what Bench Bar is—what can attendees expect in terms of programming and substance?

Karmen: There are presenters and speakers on a wide variety of topics, and although the basics are the same as you practice family, probate, criminal, or civil litigation, how you interact and practice those areas of law is different and everybody's take on that is different. The perspectives that are brought to the seminar are very different, and it brings an avenue that a lot of people don't see. I tell people all the time, I don't know everything, but I bet I can find somebody who knows it.

Marvina: Who is Bench Bar really for? Judges, seasoned attorneys, new lawyers?

Karmen: All of the above. It's for everyone.

Marvina: What is the value of having both judges and attorneys in the same space for two full days?

Karmen: You build respect and camaraderie all at the same time, which is not something that generally happens between the bench and the bar at other places.

Karmen Johnson 2025–2026

Bench Bar Chair

Marvina: Okay, we’ve talked about what it is. Now let’s talk about what it’s not. What are some common misconceptions about Bench Bar?

Karmen: That it’s a wild party. I think that’s what some people think. And it’s really not.

Marvina: What efforts do you take to make Bench Bar not intimidating to first-timers?

Karmen: I can see someone who doesn’t know a lot of people being somewhat apprehensive about meeting new people, especially a large number of people. But I think the way that we in Tarrant County handle Bench Bar is marvelous . We interact with the newer lawyers and try to seek them out and make sure they feel welcome. Somebody has to take the initiative and say, “Hey, why don’t you come and do this with us? Why don’t you sit and have breakfast with us?”

Marvina: Why is the informal time, the meals, the socials, the hallway conversations, just as important as the sessions?

Karmen: Because it’s how you get to know people. There was a judge on the Court of Appeals, and I know I’m not going to say his name, but I didn’t know who he was from Adam's house cat. But we were having sandwiches or something, and we just started talking and laughing, and then I found out who he was. And I was like, oh, that’s the name that goes with the person? Well, okay! So it worked out well.

Marvina: Well, this year’s theme, as you alluded to earlier, is the MARVEL-ous Bench Bar. How does the theme enhance the experience?

Karmen: Tarrant County lawyers are marvelous. The Tarrant County bench is marvelous. I mean, you can’t get this sort of camaraderie just anywhere. If you practice in Tarrant County, it’s very different from practicing anywhere else. And anybody from any other area, once they come through, they say, “Oh no, I love coming to Tarrant County because you all are different.” And we like that.

Marvina: Why did you personally say yes to chairing this year’s conference?

Karmen: I got forced into it. No—I thought it was an honor. It was a surprise that anybody would even think to ask me. So I really couldn’t say no.

Marvina: If someone’s on the fence about registering, what would you tell them?

Karmen: Jump on our side. Jump on over. Come on. Let’s go.

Marvina: Anything else you want to add about this year’s conference?

Karmen: We plan to learn a lot, laugh a lot, and have a lot of fun. That’s the plan for this year. g

SUIT UP FOR BENCH BAR XXXI!

2026–2027 Board of Directors Election

Voting for the 2026 Tarrant County Bar Association Board of Directors began on March 3 and will continue through 4:00 p.m. on March 26.

PRESIDENT-ELECT

Caroline Harrison

VICE PRESIDENT

Joe Cleveland

SECRETARY-TREASURER

Robert Blankenship

Mollee Westfall

DIRECTOR, PLACE 1

Trey Loftin

Christopher Sisk

DIRECTOR, PLACE 2

Nikki Chriesman-Green

Karon Rowden

DIRECTOR, PLACE 3

Amy Allen

Clark Rucker

Eligible members should have received an email from BallotBox containing their official ballot on the morning of March 3. All attorney members who live or practice in Tarrant County are eligible to vote. If you believe you are eligible but did not receive a ballot, please contact the Tarrant County Bar Association.

Members are encouraged to review candidate biographies and video introductions online before casting their vote. Preview the Candidates »

27.

BENCH BAR CONFERENCE XXXI CLE SPEAKERS

Frank Adler Judge Patricia Burns Judge Brent Carr (Ret.)

Judge Kimberly Fitzpatrick

Lauren Duffer

Beth Edwards

Sam Johndroe

Judge James Munford

Leon Reed, Jr.

Bryan Williams

Karmen Johnson

Karon Rowden

Anna Summersett

Preston Mundt

Dr. Carol Nati Judge Kenneth Newell

Jody Sanders Dwayne Smith Judge Eric Starnes

Judge Don Pierson

Steve Lund Spencer Mainka

BENCH BAR CONFERENCE XXXI CLE SCHEDULE

FRIDAY, APRIL 10, 2026

9:30 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.

10:15 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.

CLE Tracks – Session 1

Give Me Rent

Judge Don Pierson, Tarrant County Court at Law No. 1

Sam Johndroe, Johndroe Law, PLLC

Marvel Playbook: Power-Up the Toolbox

Bryan Williams, LexisNexis

Truth, Justice, and the American Rule: Recovering Attorneys’ Fees in Texas

Jody Sanders, Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP

CLE Tracks – Session 2

With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility: AI in Legal Practice

Spencer Mainka, Pham Harrison, LLP

Guardians of the Docket: Judicial and Practitioner Strategies for Vexatious Litigants

Judge Kenneth Newell, 233rd District Court

Steve Lund, Tarrant County Criminal District Attorney’s Office

Sometimes Heroes Need Saving: A Guide to Veteran’s Treatment Court

Leon Reed, Law Office of Leon Reed, Jr.

11:15 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

CLE Tracks – Session 3

Probate and Real Estate

Beth Edwards, Edwards Law, PLLC

Turning Points: Navigating Juvenile Law in Texas

Frank Adler, Law Office of Frank Adler

Protecting the Heroes of Justice to Ensure Safety for Attorneys, Courts, and Clients

Karon Rowden, Texas A&M School of Law – Family & Veterans Advocacy Clinic

BENCH BAR CONFERENCE XXXI CLE SCHEDULE

SATURDAY, APRIL 11, 2026

8:00 a.m. – 8:45 a.m.

9:00 a.m. – 9:45 a.m.

10:00 a.m. – 10:45 a.m

Breakfast with the Bench: The A-Team Edition

No Masks, No Chaos: Hiring, Training and Retaining Emotionally Inexpensive Lawyers

Anna Summersett, Varghese Summersett PLLC

Mental Health is Everyone’s Superpower

Judge Brent Carr (Ret.), County Criminal Court No. 9

Dr. Carol Nati, MHMR of Tarrant County

11:00 a.m. – 11:45 a.m

12:00 p.m. – 12:45 p.m.

1:00 p.m. – 1:45 p.m

Not All Heroes Wear Capes: Law, Ethics and Surrogacy

Lauren Duffer, Gaydos Duffer, P.C.

The Multiverse of Courtrooms: Trial Tips from the Bench

Moderator: Karmen Johnson, Attorney at Law

Panelists: Judge Patricia Burns, Probate Court No. 1

Judge Kimberly Fitzpatrick, 342nd District Court

Judge James Munford, 322nd District Court

Judge Eric Starnes, County Criminal Court No. 7

Superpowers in Plain Sight: Misunderstood and Underused Discovery and Evidentiary Rules

Preston Mundt, Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP

Dwayne Smith, Gardner Smith & Vaughan, PLLC

GUARDIANS

2026 TCBA BENCH BAR SPONSORSHIPS

AVENGERS $10,000

• Listed as the title sponsor on all marketing materials – “Bench Bar brought to you by the Tarrant County Bar Association and [Your Firm Name].”

• Exclusive sponsorship of one special event with custom signage (see attached table for options).

• Complimentary suite upgrade for one designated attendee (first-come, first-served).

• One complimentary attorney registration for the event.

• 50% off one additional registration.

• Four complimentary golfer registrations.

• Prominent placement on t-shirts, signage, and all pre-event marketing materials, including a backlink to your firm’s website.

• May distribute one branded promotional/swag item during your sponsored activity.

• Special recognition at the event, including the opportunity to address attendees prior to the Friday night dinner.

• Business cards/firm swag included in the attendee goody bags.

GUARDIANS $5,500

• 50% off one registration for the event.

• Complimentary suite upgrade for one designated attendee (first-come, first-served).

• Exclusive sponsorship of one special event with custom signage (see attached table for options).

• Prominent placement on t-shirts, signage, and all pre-event marketing materials, including a backlink to your firm’s website.

• Two complimentary golfer registrations.

• May distribute one branded promotional/swag item during your sponsored activity.

• Special recognition at the event, including a representative or committee member publicly thanking your firm and addressing attendees prior to the special event.

CAPTAIN $3,500

• Exclusive sponsorship of one special event with custom signage (see attached table for options).

• Prominent placement on t-shirts, signage, and all pre-event marketing materials.

• One complimentary golfer registration for the event.

• May distribute one branded promotional/swag item during your sponsored activity.

• Special recognition at the event, including a representative or committee member publicly thanking your firm and addressing attendees prior to the special event.

IRON $1,500

• Exclusive sponsorship of one special event with custom signage (see attached table for options).

• Placement on general marketing materials at the event.

SIDEKICK $500

• Mention on signage and marketing materials at the event.

GUARDIANS

2026 TCBA BENCH BAR VENDOR SPONSORSHIPS

GENERAL INFORMATION

• All rates are for ONE person representing the vendor. Additional representatives may be added for $250 per person (meals not included). Activities are extra.

• Vendor tables are intended for both Friday and Saturday. No discounts will be given for attending only one day of the conference.

GUARDIANS $5,500

• Premiere table placement.

• Priority pick for introductions to attendees.

• 50% off registration.

• Participation in conference giveaway.

• Exclusive sponsorship of one special event with custom signage (see attached table for options).

• Prominent placement on t-shirts, signage, and all pre-event marketing materials, including a backlink to your firm’s website.

• Two complimentary golfer registrations.

• May distribute one branded promotional/swag item during your sponsored activity.

• Special recognition at the event, including a representative or committee member publicly thanking your firm and addressing attendees prior to the special event.

CAPTAIN $3,500

• Exclusive sponsorship of one special event with custom signage (see attached table for options).

• Placement on t-shirts, signage, and all pre-event marketing materials.

• One complimentary golfer registration for the event.

• May distribute branded promotional/swag items during your sponsored activity.

• Special recognition at the event, including a representative or committee member publicly thanking your firm and addressing attendees prior to the special event.

• Table selection privileges after Guardian tables have been assigned, with priority based on registration order.

• Introduction to attendees during one CLE session.

• Opportunity to participate in a conference giveaway.

IRON $1,750

• Placement on general marketing materials at the event.

• Introduction to attendees during one CLE session.

• Opportunity to participate in a conference giveaway.

• Table selection privileges after Guardian and Captain tables have been assigned, with priority based on registration order.

SIDEKICK $750

• Table only.

• Opportunity to participate in a conference giveaway.

• Table selection privileges after Guardian, Captain, and Iron tables have been assigned, based on availability and registration order.

YLA SNAPSHOT

SOLA CAMPBELL

JOHN EASTER

2025–2026 TCYLA President

2024–2025 TCYLA President

Spring Into TCYLA

pring is an amazing time to get plugged into the Tarrant County Young Lawyers Association, and we have an exciting lineup of events designed to bring value to lawyers across Tarrant County.

If you have been thinking about getting more involved or encouraging a young lawyer in your office to do the same, this is the perfect season to jump in.

We start with a Happy Hour on March 19 from 5:30–7:30 p.m. at Rabbit Hole Pub. These gatherings are relaxed, welcoming, and intentionally low-pressure. TCYLA happy hours are one of the easiest ways to build relationships and expand your professional circle.

Next, on April 14 from 12–1 p.m., Sasha Begovic will present a CLE on cybersecurity risk management. Cyber threats aren’t slowing down, and lawyers need to understand how to manage digital risk. Sign up early for this lunchtime program to secure your spot!

We will close out April with one of our signature events, Spring Fiesta on April 23, 2026, at Joe T. Garcia’s. Great drinks,

great atmosphere, and even better company. Spring Fiesta is consistently one of our most well-attended events, and it’s a fantastic opportunity to bring a colleague and experience firsthand what makes TCYLA such a strong community. g

Stay Connected with TCYLA

For updates, registration links, and event details, follow us:

Welcome

New Members of the TCBA:

ATTORNEYS

Abbie Adkins

Adeline Adkinson

Sion Alford

Jasmine Avery

Amanda Baker

Heather Banahan Nease

Clarissa Bellomy

Theo Bruton

Marleigh Bunch

Tayler Canton

Kacey Cargile

Edward Chin

Connor Clark

B.C. Cornish

Spencer Crichton

Nathania Davis

Rolando de la Garza

Michael Doss

Catherine Edwards

Chase Evans

Rashelle Fetty

Ellen Fleischmann

Roy Golsan

Stephanie Gramada

Andrew Griffin

Taylor Harris

Charles Hill

Jason Hornsby

Angela Hough

Katelyn Kaske

Michael Kelly

Sydney Lawson

Madison Littlefield

Sophie Mathews

David May

Brittney McClinton

Ashlyn Moore

Paula Moore

Alessandro Pauri

Lisa Potter

Victoria Powell

Executive Director’s Report on Membership MEMBERSHIP REPORT

At a recent meeting, the TCBA Board of Directors approved an adjustment to membership dues, effective for the upcoming membership year, beginning with the extended promo on April 1, 2026.

This decision was made thoughtfully and deliberately. Our last dues adjustment was a few years ago, and during that time the cost of delivering high-quality programming, expanding CLE offerings, and investing in staff and technology has steadily increased.

Even with this adjustment, TCBA continues to have the lowest membership dues among the Texas Metro Bars. We remain firmly committed to accessibility while strengthening the value and impact of membership.

What is Changing

The updated annual dues structure will be:

Attorneys

Attorneys (5+ years)

Attorneys (1–5 years)

Attorneys (<1 year)

Judges & Government

Attorneys*

$190 → $225

$125 → $150

$62.50 → $75

$90–$130 → $150

Other Membership Categories

Law Student Membership

Legal Staff

Associate Members

Faculty

$0 → $15

$40 → $40 (no change)

$150 → $175

$130 → $150

*To simplify and align our public service categories, all government attorneys and members of the judiciary will move to a unified rate, as opposed to previous years when we have had seven categories.

By Kayla Dailey, Executive Director

Why the Adjustment?

This change allows TCBA to:

• Maintain and expand meaningful CLE programming

• Support signature events

• Invest in membership technology and communications

• Sustain our operational costs

• Continue providing staff support to sections and committees

Our Commitment to Value

Membership in TCBA is more than CLE hours. It is:

• Professional connection

• Leadership development

• Mentorship

• Community service

• A seat at the table shaping our local legal community

We are deeply grateful for the support of our members. Your engagement is what makes TCBA strong, relevant, and impactful.

If you have questions about dues or membership categories, please do not hesitate to reach out. g

LAWYERS ON THE MOVE &

in the News

Taylor Harrington Joins Brackett & Ellis

Taylor Harrington focuses his practice on litigation, where he manages complex legal issues and particularly enjoys motion practice. He is skilled at crafting strong, strategic responses to plaintiffs’ filings.

Taylor earned his J.D. from Texas A&M School of Law and holds a bachelor’s degree from Dallas Baptist University. He joins Brackett & Ellis as an associate. g

Brandon Carmack Joins Duane Morris

Carmack earned his J.D., magna cum laude, from Mitchell Hamline School of Law, where he graduated in the top 10 percent of his class and was published in the Mitchell Hamline Law Review He received his B.A. in Political Economy from Hillsdale College.

Taylor Winn Joins Duane Morris

Shannon Pritchard

Emily Pyle

Leon Reed

Stephanie Reynolds

Samuel Rosado

David Routzon

Erin Rutherford

Aubrian Sanders

Haley Shaw

Lauren Smith

Scott Stewart

Sven Stricker

Brandon Carmack is a senior associate in the firm’s Trial Practice Group. His practice focuses on complex commercial litigation, including contract disputes and matters involving soft intellectual property such as trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets. He has experience handling all phases of litigation in federal and state courts, from case strategy through discovery, motion practice, expert depositions, and trial.

Prior to joining Duane Morris, Carmack practiced at national and regional law firms representing both plaintiffs and defendants in a wide range of commercial and IP litigation matters.

Taylor Winn is a senior associate in the firm’s Employment, Labor, Benefits and Immigration Practice Group. He counsels employers on a wide range of workplace issues, including employee management matters, employment agreements, and compliance with federal employment laws. He also represents employers in administrative proceedings and litigates discrimination, wage and hour, and noncompete disputes.

Prior to entering private practice, Winn served as an Honors Program Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas, where he conducted criminal investigations and prosecuted federal offenses and handled appellate matters before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Winn earned his J.D. from Texas A&M University School of Law and his undergraduate degree from Texas State University. g

RETIREMENT RECOGNITION

Stephen S. Mosher

What type of law did you practice?

Intellectual property (Registered Patent Attorney)

What is one takeaway from your time as an attorney?

Satisfaction of obtaining patents for clients for more than 30 years.

Where did you work and how long?

• Tandy Corporation, Fort Worth — Computer R&D and Law Department (17 years)

• Howison & Arnott, LLP, Dallas (6 years)

• Whitaker, Chalk, Swindle & Schwartz PLLC, Fort Worth (21 years)

How do you plan to spend your retirement?

Spending more time with family; reading and writing (essays and memoirs); traveling; and serving on boards of higher education institutions. g

Desiree Strong

Carrie Tapia

Evan Taylor

Jessica Temple

Levi Thomas

Deana Tillotson

Melissa Tucker

Alexis Vestal

Carla Vogel

Adrienne Wall

Donald West

Edward Wilkinson

James Williams

Jason Wright

LEGAL STAFF

Susy Johnson

ASSOCIATES

William Abigail

John Doyen

Kristin Getz

Konrad Halbert

Amanda Lewis

Negin Pahlavan

Satchel Stillwell

LAW STUDENTS

Patricia de Lima

David Humphreys

Katie Johnson

Brandon Rubsamen

Joseph Sute

Clarence Warren

The Deal Behind the Doll: What

Pro Bono Makes Possible

By Jason Smith Law Offices of Jason Smith (Fort Worth) | jasons@letsgotocourt.com

When people think about pro bono, they usually picture a courtroom. A hearing. A brief filed late at night. A lawyer standing next to someone who needs help navigating a system that was not built for them.

That work matters. I have deep respect for it. That’s what I do.

But there is another kind of pro bono that is just as real, just as necessary, and far less visible. It is the work that happens before the press release, before the ribbon cutting, before the moment the public sees something and assumes it simply appeared.

It is transactional pro bono. Contracts. Reviews. Terms. Negotiation. The unglamorous documents that determine whether an idea becomes a reality, or stays a good intention stuck in a planning meeting.

In January, Mattel released the Dr. Opal Lee Barbie, honoring the Fort Worth educator known as the “Grandmother of Juneteenth,” as part of Barbie’s Inspiring Women collection.

I am proud that my firm, the Law Offices of Jason Smith, played a small role behind the scenes, providing pro bono legal support connected to the contracts and terms necessary to help bring that tribute to life.

I cannot and will not share confidential details. That is not the point. The point is the principle and the invitation.

Because this is exactly the type of moment where lawyers should recognize the full range of what we can offer.

Why Transactional Pro Bono Matters

Community projects, legacy tributes, nonprofit partnerships, and mission-driven collaborations often involve multiple stakeholders. Sometimes those stakeholders include major brands. Sometimes they include foundations, designers, event organizers, or community leaders. Each party has responsibilities, expectations, and risk.

A well-drafted agreement does not just protect a party. It protects the project.

It can clarify who has approval rights, who is responsible for what, what happens if timelines shift, and how each party honors the name, likeness, and legacy of the person

“I hope my story encourages the next generation to never underestimate the power of one voice. As I often say, one person can start a change, and that can change the world.”

—Dr. Opal Lee, “Grandmother of Juneteenth”

Mattel’s Dr. Opal Lee Barbie from the Barbie Inspiring Women collection honoring the “Grandmother of Juneteenth.”

Dr. Opal Lee with Fort Worth attorney Jason Smith, whose firm provided pro bono legal support connected to the collaboration behind Mattel’s Dr. Opal Lee Barbie.

at the center of the work. It can reduce misunderstanding, minimize future conflict, and keep a project from drifting off course when momentum builds and attention arrives.

In other words, contract work is not separate from impact. It is often the structure that holds impact up.

A Texas Story with National Reach

What made this moment especially meaningful is that Dr. Opal Lee’s story is rooted in Fort Worth, Texas, but her legacy belongs to the country.

Ms. Opal is the most hopeful person I have ever met. She has said, “I hope my story encourages the next generation to never underestimate the power of one voice.”

That quote is true in civic life, and it is true in professional life too. Sometimes one voice is an activist, a teacher, an organizer. Sometimes one voice is a lawyer who reads the fine print, asks the extra question, and helps a project move forward with clarity.

A Practical Call to the Profession

If you are a lawyer who wants to do pro bono, find the

opportunity. Start with the Tarrant County Bar LegalLine. The Second Court of Appeals offers pro bono opportunities too. Maybe your church, or your mosque, or your favorite nonprofit needs help with a legal matter. Make it known you are willing to help.

Offer to review agreements for a nonprofit. Help a community group understand a contract before they sign it. Assist with negotiation so expectations are realistic and responsibilities are clear. In many projects, that support is what makes it possible for the mission-driven people to focus on the mission.

Pro bono does not have to be one shape. It can be litigation. It can be appellate work. It can be transactional support. It can be mentoring. It can be educating. It can be any form of legal skill used in service of the public good.

The work is not always visible. But it is often foundational. And when a Fort Worth icon’s legacy is honored in a way that reaches families across the country, it is a good reminder that sometimes impact is built quietly, one paragraph or one case at a time. g

By Sarah Hall Hoffman, Pro Bono Programs Director

Julie Sladek Past Chair Recognition Award

Julie Sladek is Assistant General Counsel of Legal Operations at MHMR of Tarrant County, where she provides legal counsel and advice to staff and leadership in accordance with state, federal, and administrative agency law. She has practiced law in Tarrant County since 2006, starting her career at the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office in the family violence protective order and civil mental health sections of the Civil Division. Following her time with the District Attorney’s Office, Julie served as a Regional Attorney for the Department of Family and Protective Services, Adult Protective Services. She later worked for Legal Aid of

NorthWest Texas and helped form a Medical-Legal Partnership with MHMR of Tarrant County to provide direct legal representation to individuals in services with MHMR. Julie has worked closely within Tarrant County to aid vulnerable disabled adults and older adults through her work with Guardianship Services, Inc., where she served as Director of the Financial Exploitation Prevention Center and currently serves on the Board of Directors. She has been a member of the Tarrant County Bar Association since 2006 and enjoys providing legal education and resources to the local community. Julie earned her Juris Doctor from Texas Tech School of Law and holds a degree in Business Administration from Wayland Baptist University. g

2026 PRO BONO AWARD SPOTLIGHT

Tarrant County Bar Association

LAWYER REFERRAL & INFORMATION SERVICE

The Lawyer Referral & Information Service (LRIS) is a service of the Tarrant County Bar Association that benefits both TCBA member attorneys and the public.

Approved by the American Bar Association, TCBA’s Lawyer Referral & Information Service allows member attorneys to receive client referrals and build their business, while helping callers quickly find an attorney in the area of law they need.

The program is intended to help individuals who are able to pay normal attorney fees but have difficulty finding legal representation due to lack of experience with the legal system, lack of information about needed services, or fear of costs.

LRIS is completely customizable for participating attorneys with: practice areas

LRIS is pleased to announce that Richard Hyde has earned the title of Top Referral Attorney for TCBA’s Lawyer Referral & Information Service for the period from July 1, 2025, to present. Through his dedicated participation in the program, Richard earned $19,882.18!

Why Join LRIS?

• Maximize Your Earnings: Like Richard, you can earn substantial rewards by offering quality referrals.

• Grow Your Practice: Connect with clients in need of your expertise and grow your client base.

• Build Your Reputation: Build valuable relationships and be recognized for your exceptional service. Questions about how to help? Please contact lris@tarrantbar.org.

For more details about joining LRIS, please visit www.tarrantbar.org/joinlris or email lris@tarrantbar.org.

I Didn’t Think They Could Build That There

By Leslie Hunt

City Attorney’s Office – City of Fort Worth | leslie.hunt@fortworthtexas.gov 2025–2026 TCBA Board of Directors

You drive to work every day. Perhaps you typically drive the same route or your route varies depending on what Waze reveals about traffic and the number of “police reported ahead.” Near your house is a vacant lot. It’s a lot that’s been vacant for as long as you can remember. In the past, developers have wanted to build apartments on the lot, but they’ve faced zoning challenges because the lot is located in an area zoned commercial, which doesn’t allow for multifamily housing. Nearby neighbors who don’t want the lot developed into apartments pay attention. They consistently show up to oppose requests for a zoning change that would allow an apartment complex.

One day, as you’re driving by the lot, you notice construction is underway. Then you see a sign that reads “Future Home of The Sherwood: Affordable, Modern Apartment Homes.” You immediately wonder what happened—did your neighbors miss the notice of a zoning change request? You arrive at work and draft an email to your neighborhood distribution list to see if anyone knows what’s going on. Someone replies: Senate Bill 840.

Texas Senate Bill 840, approved by Texas lawmakers during the 89th Texas Legislature, reduces local government control by allowing multifamily housing to be built in areas zoned for commercial, office, warehouse, retail, or mixeduse without the need to seek a zoning change. As a result, some nonresidentially zoned properties are now eligible for

multifamily developments without the need to rezone to a residentially zoned district.

Allowing development to progress without a public hearing and City oversight is sometimes referred to as “allowed by right.” If a land use is allowed by right, developers are not required to go before a zoning commission or City Council. As a result, the public notices your neighbors rely on so they can attend public hearings and voice their opinions are a thing of the past.

Senate Bill 840 contains limited exceptions for properties located close to heavy industrial areas and land located near an airport or military base. Furthermore, the law does not prohibit cities from enforcing regulations related to the preservation of historic districts or landmarks.

Proponents of Senate Bill 840 believe it will help improve the state’s housing shortage in larger cities. The new law only applies to cities with populations over 150,000 located in counties with more than 300,000 people which results in an impact to approximately 20 Texas cities, including but not limited to, Fort Worth, Arlington, Grand Prairie, Dallas, Houston, Austin, Round Rock, San Antonio, McKinney, Irving, Plano, and Frisco.

Senate Bill 840 became effective on September 1, 2025. It amended Chapter 211 of the Texas Local Government Code by adding Section 211.0011 and Chapter 218 of the Local Government Code. g

MARDI LAW 2026

2026 SERJEANT OF THE MAHON INN

Tom Williams

Checking In with Tom Williams

Q: What has being part of the Eldon B. Mahon Inn of Court meant to you?

What I appreciate about the Mahon Inn is consequence of it being the only Inn in Tarrant County. In some other areas of the state and nation there are many Inns whose membership is generally tried to a specific practice area. Our membership includes lawyers with all types of practice, backgrounds, and levels of experience. To me, one of the Mahon Inn’s greatest selling points is that it is one place where you see and meet and learn from lawyers, and judges, of different backgrounds, practice skills, and experience from your own.

Q: Why do the Inns of Court still matter?

The American Inns of Court mission statement is to “advance the rule of law by achieving the highest level of professionalism through example, education, and civility.” Membership in an inn provides an opportunity for lawyers to be in a setting where you are learning from others you might not otherwise know and are exposed to other perspectives while maintaining a level of civility and professionalism.

Q: What does being selected as Sergeant of the Inn mean to you?

The prior recipients are all wonderful lawyers and people whom I respect greatly, so I am very honored to be included on the list. g

Want to know how you can join the Mahon Inn? Email kayla@tarrantbar.org for more information.

Michael A. McConnell: A Bankruptcy Judge’s Legacy

By Perry Cockerell Perry Cockerell, P.C. | perry@perrycockerell.com

For three years, from 1983 to 1986, Fort Worth attorney Michael A. McConnell served as the bankruptcy judge for the Northern District of Texas in Fort Worth.

McConnell was born in Fort Worth in 1947. After graduating from Nolan Catholic High School, he attended Loyola University and received his Bachelor of Arts in 1969. After receiving his draft notice during the Vietnam War, he enlisted in the U.S. Air Force and was assigned to the 6990th Security Squadron in Kadena Air Force Base in Okinawa. He was selected as a Mandarin Chinese language specialist and flew on high altitude reconnaissance missions on RC-135s. He logged over 1,000 hours in the air. He was discharged from the Air Force as a sergeant. He received many honors for his service.

In 1975 he graduated from the University of Texas School of Law. After law school he clerked for United States District Judge Eldon B. Mahon in Fort Worth. In 1977, he joined Cantey, Hanger, Gooch, Munn & Collins in Fort Worth where he handled banking, creditor’s rights and bankruptcy matters from a creditor’s perspective. In 1981 he made partner at the firm.

In 1983, after Bankruptcy Judge John A. Flowers ended his term on the bench, McConnell was appointed to the court. At his swearing-in ceremony he said that he had “big shoes to fill.”

McConnell joined the court during a tumultuous time in the history of the bankruptcy court system. In 1982 in Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipeline Co, 1 the U.S. Supreme Court held that the broad grant of jurisdiction granted to bankruptcy judges under 28 U.S.C. § 1471 violated Article III of the U.S. Constitution. During part of his term, McConnell operated under an emergency

1 458 U.S. 50 (1982).

2 Toren v Braniff, Inc., 50 B.R. 393 (Bankr. 1984).

3 In re Braniff Airways, Inc., 1986 WL 20577 (Bankr. 1986).

4 In re Braniff Airways, Inc., 42 B.R. 443 (Bankr. 1984).

5 61 B.R. 567 (Bankr. N.D. Tex 1986).

6 50 B.R. 468 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1985). 26 www.tarrantbar.org

order from the U.S. District Court. The 1984 Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act cured the constitutional issues.

As is typical of a bankruptcy judge, McConnell issued many decisions on a day-to-day basis while serving on the bench. When he chose to write opinions, he usually selected novel issues that had not been decided by other courts.

Braniff bankruptcy. McConnell issued some of the last decisions in the Braniff bankruptcy proceeding that originated during his predecessor’s term. After filing Chapter 11 in May 1982, Braniff reached an agreement in 1983 with the Hyatt Corporation to resume domestic airline flights and confirmed a plan of reorganization. The company changed its name to the Dalfort Corporation and created a subsidiary company referred to as the “New Braniff” to resume flights in 1984 with 30 Boeing Aircraft. Not long thereafter, New Braniff experienced considerable losses. New Braniff proposed leasing its aircraft under a joint services agreement. McConnell found the agreement violated the confirmed plan of reorganization and enjoined the agreement. 2 In another Braniff case he denied a creditor relief from the automatic stay to file suit for personal injuries from filing suit because the creditor failed to file a proof of claim in the case and the claim was therefore discharged under the plan of reorganization.3 He held that prepetition setoffs of debts could be allowed, but not allowed against post-petition payroll taxes due to the United States.4

Administrative freeze. In the case of In re Williams, 5 McConnell found that a bank acted in good faith when it imposed an administrative freeze on the debtor’s bank account to assert a right of setoff after it learned of the bankruptcy. Section 542(b) of the Bankruptcy Code permits a creditor to refuse to turn over funds if it has a right of offset and Section 362(a) (7) provides an automatic stay to set off a debt. McConnell harmonized the two provisions of the Code.

Homestead exemption/estoppel. McConnell decided the case of In re Niland, 6 one of the most controversial cases interpreting Texas homestead exemption law. The case even stumped the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that had trouble deciding

Michael A. McConnell

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Texas (1983–1986)

the case.

The case involved former Dallas Cowboys offensive guard, John Niland, who played for the team from 1966 to 1974. Niland secured a loan from a lender and submitted false affidavits claiming that the property as collateral for the loan was not his homestead. He even designated another property as his homestead. Niland went into default on the loan and the property was sold at foreclosure to Darwin Deason. Niland filed Chapter 13 bankruptcy and moved to invalidate the foreclosure sale by claiming that the property was his homestead and therefore the sale was void.

Judge McConnell found that Niland was not estopped from claiming property as his homestead despite his affidavits to the contrary. He found the foreclosure sale to be void and granted equitable subrogation to Deason for discharging the prior liens to the extent of a partial failure of title, being the actual value of the portion which title had failed, minus the value of improvements with prejudgment interest at the legal rate. He granted an equitable lien on that part of the property that was not exempt. District Judge Barefoot Sanders affirmed the decision.

The Fifth Circuit reversed the decision, finding Niland estopped from claiming the homestead because he benefitted from two homesteads.7 On rehearing the Fifth Circuit withdrew its decision and affirmed the district court, except that the court denied the equitable lien and constructive trust on the homestead.8

ERISA plan was not a spendthrift trust. In the case of In re Brooks , 9 McConnell found that the ERISA plan was not a spendthrift trust and could not be exempted under Section 42.002 of the Texas Property Code. The court found that the debtor’s post-petition salary was exempt.

Adequate protection. In In re Western Preferred Corporation, 10 McConnell held that banks were not entitled to lift the automatic stay to foreclose their lien on capital stock of the debtor’s operating subsidiaries. The court found the liquidation value to be $55 million and the fair market value to be between $65–75 million against a debt of $105 million. Since there was no equity in the collateral and the banks met their burden of proof. However, the court found that a foreclosure would cause the Debtor to lose net operating loss carry forwards and deferred taxes and would result in unsecured creditors and shareholders receiving nothing. The court found that the collateral was necessary for an effective reorganization and that there was a reasonable possibility of a successful re-

organization with a reasonable time. The court found adequate protection to the banks to be the amount of interest on the liquidation value from the date of foreclosure. The court looked to the petition date of the bankruptcy being the date the foreclosure was prevented. The realization value of $55 million and an immediate reinvestment at 10.37 percent. This decision was a win for undersecured creditors.

This decision was controversial because it allowed undersecured creditors to receive interest on their claims during the bankruptcy proceeding. In the case of In re Timbers of Inwood Forest Associates, Ltd., 11 the Fifth Circuit ruled that under secured creditors were not entitled to interest when their collateral was not decreasing in value.

Adequate protection. In In re Snelus, 12 McConnell found that in a Chapter 13 plan where the IRS had tax liens on the debtor’s homestead that did not exceed the value of the collateral, the court would not lift the automatic stay and would allow the IRS to be paid out over the plan with interest computed under section 6621 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Dismissal of bankruptcy in bad faith. In 1985, during his second year on the bench, McConnell was frustrated by a new Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing in the case of In re Little Creek Development Company , 13 that involved a one-asset real-estate case. The dispute between the debtor and the lienholder began in state court where the state court ordered an injunction bond to be posted to enjoin the foreclosure. When the debtor could not post the bond, the debtor filed Chapter 11 reorganization to stop the state court litigation. After the case was filed, the creditor moved to lift the automatic stay. The debtor responded to the motion to lift stay by bringing forward the claims made in the state court case. At the motion to lift stay hearing, McConnell dismissed the Chapter 11 proceeding based on admissions of the Debtor’s counsel regarding the purpose of the bankruptcy filing. McConnell found the bankruptcy filing to be filed in bad faith and to be an unjustifiable imposition on “already strained judicial time and resources to use the automatic stay as a replacement for an injunction conditioned upon a bond the Debtor could not or would not provide.” Following that hearing McConnell issued an opinion to supplement his ruling and set out findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Fifth Circuit reversed the decision finding more evidence was required to support the dismissal, that the issue of dismissal

Continued on page 28

7 In re Niland, 809 F.2d 272 (5th Cir. 1987).

8 In re Niland, 825 F.2d 801, 816 (5th Cir. 1987).

9 60 B.R. 155 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1986).

10 58 B.R. 201 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1985).

11 793 F.2d 1380, 1388 (5th Cir. 1986).

12 1944 WL 15649 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1984).

13 54 B.R. 510 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1985).

Continued from page 27

of the entire proceeding had not been raised in the motion to lift stay hearing. The court found that McConnell was correct in striking the defenses alleged in response to the motion to lift stay.14

Constructive trust. In the case of In re Jones, 15 McConnell found that the debtors had committed common-law fraud and deceptive trade practices by obtaining $500,000 from a businessman. The court imposed a constructive trust over all property which was acquired directly or indirectly by the debtor by fraud and imposed an equitable lien of $110,000 on the Debtor’s homestead which was used for the down payment and pierced the corporate veil of the company. The court did not impose exemplary damages or find a civil conspiracy regarding the Debtor’s accountant.

Interpleader. McConnell held that a bank had properly interpleaded funds and was not liable for legal fees or costs.16 He found that the bank had a legitimate fear or multiple demands or claims against a single fund and had not engaged in improper conduct. The court denied legal fees to the bank in seeking $9,843.91 for attorneys’ fees and costs.

Letter of credit. In the case of In re Originala Petroleum Corp, 17 McConnell granted a temporary restraining order from drawing against a letter of credit. Following the injunction hearing the court denied a temporary injunction. The court analyzed that letters of credit involve three separate and independent contracts: (1) the underlying contract between the customer and beneficiary; (2) the customer's contract with the issuing bank to issue the letter of credit; and (3) the issuing bank’s contract to pay the beneficiary upon submission of certain documents specified in the letter of credit. (a “documentary” letter of credit) or simply upon the presentation of a draft (a “clean” letter of credit). The court held that the letter of credit was a “clean” letter of credit and not a documentary letter of credit. A clean letter of credit requires only the submission of a draft (or drafts) for payment, while a documentary letter of credit requires specified accompanying documents as well. McConnell found no proof of fraud or forgery in the documents or in the transaction or a likelihood to prevail on the merits.

Oil and gas mechanic’s liens. In In re Meg Petroleum Corp., 18

McConnell found oil and gas mechanic’s liens to be invalid because they were not filed within six months of the work performed, but another set of mechanic’s liens to be valid and would relate back to when the work was delivered thereby making them prior to a deed of trust on the property.

Preferential transfer/guarantor. In the case of Aerco Metals, Inc. , 19 McConnell held that a bank’s security interest in inventory, accounts and contract rights taken within one year of the filing of bankruptcy was a “double transfer” for purposes of §547(b)(1) because it benefitted not only the bank but also the insider guarantors because it reduced their liability under their guaranty contracts. The court found that the Trustee failed to offer proof of the insolvency of the debtor at the time of the transfers and they would have received under Chapter 7. McConnell held that even if the transfer of the security was a preferential transfer that he would restrict the recovery to the insider who guaranteed the note and not the bank. McConnell wrote: “The Court does not wish to punish the Bank for the prudence it exercised in obtaining a guaranty.”

Substantive consolidation. In DRW Property Co. 82 d/b/a Apache Arms , 20 McConnell denied the debtor’s request to substantively consolidate 109 related nondebtor partnerships to form a single limited partnership for all purposes. He found that the benefits of substantive consolidation did not outweigh the harm it would cause creditors. In the same case, undersecured creditors filed an objection to the disclosure statement in the Chapter 11 case and requested that the statement disclose that nonrecourse undersecured creditors could file deficiency claims to be treated in the plan. 21 The court held that the undersecured creditors were not entitled to file deficiency claims, except in two circumstances not applicable here, and overruled the objection. In the same case, he held that investors could be classified into one voting classification for voting purposes.22

Plan confirmation. In In re Neff, 23 McConnell confirmed a Chapter 11 plan in a farming operation, finding it feasible and in the best interests of creditors over objections that the debtor grossly overstated future expenses and income. The court found the projections to be reasonable based on past performance. One class of creditors accepted the plan and

Continued on page 29

14 In the Matter of Little Creek Dev. Co., 779 F.2d 1068, 1070 (5th Cir. 1986).

15 50 B.R. 911 (N.D. Tex. 1985).

16 Central National Bank of San Angelo v. Jones, 61 B.R. 48 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1986).

17 30 B.R. 1003 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1984).

18 61 B.R. 14 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1986).

19 60 B.R. 77 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1985).

20 54 B.R. 489 (Bankr. N.D. Tex 1985).

21 57 B.R. 987 (Bankr. N.D. Tex 1986).

22 60 B.R. 505 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1986).

23 60 B.R. 448 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1985).

28 www.tarrantbar.org ▪ MARCH/APRIL 2026

Continued from page 28

another class rejected the plan. The court confirmed the plan (“crammed down”) finding that the secured creditors would receive the value of their collateral.

Attorneys’ fees. McConnell made adjustments and denied legal fees to a law firm in the case of In re Consolidated Bancshares 24 The court denied legal fees to attorneys who had filed a shareholders’ derivative suit that had been filed prior to the bankruptcy proceeding. The plan called for the litigation to be settled. The attorneys sought the fees of $231,947.50 on the grounds that they had made a “substantial contribution” to the case. The U.S. Trustee opposed the fees. McConnell granted the objection and denied the fees.

Resignation

In 1986, after three years on the bench, McConnell resigned to return to private practice. He joined the firm of Kelly, Appleman, Hart & Hallman. Later he set up McConnell & Associates and McConnell, Goodrich & Lenox and moved to

24 49 B.R. 467 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 1985).

Jackson Walker, LLP.

In 2013 he returned to Kelly Hart & Hallman and headed the firm’s Reorganization and Bankruptcy Practice until he passed away in 2023. During his legal career, he often served as a bankruptcy trustee, examiner, and plan administrator. He was an avid sailor and sailed competitively for over 50 years. He held every office at the Boat Club in Fort Worth and in 1987 was named Commodore. He was a lover of military history.

On March 25, 2023, he passed away at the age of 76. A memorial service was held at All Saints’ Episcopal Church in Fort Worth followed by a reception at River Crest Country Club. g

About the Author

Perry Cockerell is a Dallas attorney and founder of Perry Cockerell, P.C. His practice focuses on real estate litigation, land title disputes, and trial and appellate litigation in state and federal courts.

General CLEs

Foster Youth Grant Project - What It Can Do for Your Client

Speaker: Samuel Sanchez, Texas A&M University School of Law

CLE: 1 hour (FREE for TCBA Members)

Section CLEs

Appellate Law Section

Topic: How Lawyers Can Uphold the Constitution & Rule of Law

Speaker: Dr. Bill Chriss, Chair of the Appellate Section of the State Bar of Texas

CLE: 1 hour ($40 for TCBA Members)

Business Litigation Section

Topic: Charting New Territory: Texas Business Courts’ First Year

Speakers: Judge Jerry Bullard, Eighth Business Court Division

Judge Brian Stagner, Eighth Business Court Division

Moderator: Judge Chris Taylor, 48th District Court

CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)

Construction Law Section

Topic: Subcontract Negotiations: The 2026 Way

Speaker: Kimber Davison, Griffith Davison

CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)

Topic: Truth or Tech – Navigating AI Generated Evidence in the Courtroom

Speaker: Beth Silverman, ArcherHall

CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)

Topic: Design Professional Contract Negotiations

Speaker: James Pruden, Freese and Nichols, Inc.

CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)

Topic: Change Order Reviews: Validity & Reasonableness

Speaker: Akshaya Iyer, Peritia Partners

CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)

Topic: Private Equity in the Real Estate Development and Construction Industries

Speaker: Benton Wheatley, Duane Morris LLP

CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members, $10 for Law Students)

Energy Law Section

Topic: From Pipelines to Powerlines – Opportunities and Obstacles for Energy in the Rapid Growth of Data Centers

Speaker: Mark Doré, The Doré Law Firm, LLC

CLE: 1 hour ($30 for TCBA Members)

Topic: Navigating Safe Harbor: The Texas Division Order Statute

Speaker: Megan Knell, Steptoe & Johnson, PLLC

CLE: 1 hour ($40 for TCBA Members)

Topic: Produced Water in Texas: A Fluid Frontier

Speaker: Kyle Weldon, James D. Bradbury, PLLC

CLE: 1 hour ($40 for TCBA Members)

Fort Worth Business & Estate Section

Topic: 2025 Hot Topics in Estate Planning Seminar

Speakers: Mike Bourland, Bourland Wall & Wenzel, P.C.

John Porter, Baker Botts LLP

Lee Schwemer, Current Lecturer - UTA

Steve Akers, Bessemer Trust, Dallas

CLE: 1 hour (FREE for Section Members)

Topic: The Biggest Retirement Expense Your Clients Don’t Expect

Speaker: Colby VanSickler, F3 Wealth Management, LLC

CLE: 1 hour (FREE for Section Members)

Topic: Current Events

Speaker: Kasey Pipes, Corley Pipes Consulting | High Water

Strategies | The Pipes Company

CLE: 1 hour (FREE for Section Members)

Topic: The Charitable Trust Planning Toolbox

Speaker: Levi Dillion, Riverstone Law, PLLC

CLE: 1 hour (FREE for Section Members)

Intellectual Property Law Section

Topic: Trade Secret – Litigation in Federal Court

Speaker: Chris Granaghan, Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC

CLE: 1 hour ($20 for TCBA Members)

Real Estate Section

Topic: The Platting Process with the City of Fort Worth

Speaker: Alex Parks, City of Fort Worth

CLE: 1 hour ($25 for TCBA Members)

Topic: Walking Thru the Closing Process and Navigating the Title Commitment

Speaker: Patricia Nicholson, Baker Firm - Fidelity National Title

CLE: 1 hour ($25 for TCBA Members)

Mentor Monday Seminar Series with Steven C. Laird

Guest Speaker: Federal Magistrate Judge Hal R. Ray, Jr.

United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

1 hour Ethics (FREE for TCBA Members)

Guest Speaker: Glenn Lewis, Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP

1 hour Ethics (FREE for TCBA Members)

Guest Speaker: Judge Pat Gallagher, 96th District Court

1 hour Ethics (FREE for TCBA Members)

Guest Speaker: Lu Pham, Pham Harrison, LLP

1 hour Ethics (FREE for TCBA Members)

Guest Speaker: Major Brandon Reese, United States Marine Corps

1 hour Ethics (FREE for TCBA Members)

Guest Speaker: John Easter, Padfield & Stout LLP; 2025–2026 TCYLA President

1 hour Ethics (FREE for TCBA Members)

Guest Speaker: Judge Bob McCoy, County Criminal Court No. 3

1 hour Ethics (FREE for TCBA Members)

Brown Bag Seminar Series

Topic: Hot Topics

CLE: 3.25 hours