Case Results

Clouthier Law, PLLC fought dozens of appeals and writs of habeas corpus in courts throughout the State of Texas, Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, the United States Supreme Court, and United States District Courts. Clouthier Law strives for a standard of excellence, seeking to provide our clients the best possible chance of success on appeal.

Among others, Clouthier Law has successfully:

1. Obtained acquittal on multiple charges in criminal appeals;
2. Reversed white collar restitution in excess of $500,000 after a plea and unconditional waiver of appeal;
3. Multiple successes in post-conviction habeas proceedings;
4. Successfully obtained Certificate of Appealability and reversal in an appeal from a federal habeas case, resulting in our client’s immediate release from incarceration;
5. Reversal of entire property distribution in Divorce trial;
6. Reversal of case dismissal in both state and federal courts;
7. Reversal of judgments against our clients, remanding to district court for new trial;
8. And more.

Following are some of Clouthier Law’s recent successful outcomes:

Estrada v. Boss Exotics, LLC, No. 05-23-00990-CV, in the Fifth District Court of Appeals in Dallas, Texas (Opinion issued on December 18, 2024)

Reversed and remanded in part. In an appeal from a no answer default judgment rendered against our client for substantial damages, the court of appeals reversed the award of unliquidated damages and attorney’s fees and remanded to the trial court.

Clouthier v. Brown, No. 03-23-00777-CV, in the Third District Court of Appeals in Austin, Texas (Opinion issued August 30, 2024)

Reversed and remanded. After a disgruntled former client sued the firm and the firm’s principal attorney, a motion to dismiss was filed under the TCPA, which the trial court denied. In an interlocutory appeal, we argued that failing to dismiss the case was contrary to the TCPA, and the court of appeals agreed. The court reversed and remanded the case for mandatory attorney’s fees to be awarded to the firm.

Dalavai v. University of California San Diego Health, No. 23-55411, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Opinion issued August 16, 2024)

Vacated and remanded. After the district court dismissed the suit for lack of standing, we appealed. The court of appeals found that the district court’s finding that our client lacked standing was in error and vacated the dismissal, remanding for trial.

Gonzales v. Gonzales, No. 03-22-00408-CV, in the Third District Court of Appeals in Austin, Texas (Opinion issued June 28, 2024)

Reversed and rendered in part. In an appeal from a final decree of divorce where the trial court awarded a money judgment for retroactive child support, we argued that judgment was improper under the law. The court of appeals agreed, reversed the portion of the Final Decree that awarded a money judgment for retroactive child support, and rendered judgment in favor of our client on that issue.

In the Matter of the Marriage of Vedullapalli and Velagandula, No. 05-22-01248-CV, in the Fifth District Court of Appeals in Dallas, Texas (Opinion issued June 28, 2024)

Reversed and remanded in part. In an appeal from a Final Decree of Divorce, we argued that the trial court mischaracterized our client’s separate property when reconstituting the estate, thus awarding a disproportionate share of the community estate to the other party. The court of appeals agreed that our client’s separate property was mischaracterized, and it reversed the portion of the judgment dividing the community estate and ordered a new division.

In re Phillip Sanders, No. 11-24-00109-CV, in the Eleventh District Court of Appeals in Eastland, Texas (Opinion issued June 20, 2024)

Mandamus relief conditionally granted. We filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus after a series of requests for admissions were deemed admitted for serving the responses late. We argued the trial court clearly abused its discretion because there was no evidence in the record that the late response was an act of flagrant bad faith or callous disregard for the rules. The court of appeals agreed and conditionally granted mandamus relief, ordering the trial court to grant our client’s motion to withdraw the deemed admissions.

Allen v. Allen, No. 04-22-00677-CV, in the Fourth District Court of Appeals in San Antonio, Texas (Opinion issued March 27, 2024)

Reversed and remanded in part. In an appeal from a Final Decree of Divorce, we challenged the Order Dividing Military Retired Pay and Other Benefits (the DRO) because the DRO was not in compliance with applicable law. The court of appeals agreed and reversed and remanded in part.

In the Estate of Lizzie Bonita Taylor, Deceased, No. 07-23-00342-CV, in the Seventh District Court of Appeals in Amarillo, Texas (Opinion issued February 21, 2024)

Affirmed. Our client prevailed on summary judgment in the trial court and the opposing party appealed. Agreeing with our arguments, the court of appeals affirmed in our client’s favor.

Kabia v. State, No. 06-23-00118-CR, in the Sixth District Court of Appeals in Texarkana, Texas (Opinion issued February 6, 2024)

Modified the trial court’s judgment. In a criminal appeal from a probation revocation, we argued the trial court erred when it stacked our client’s sentences, resulting in an eight year term of confinement instead of two years. The court of appeals agreed with our position and affirmed as modified, reducing the sentence from eight years to only two.

Clark v. Payne, No. 21-6634, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (August 1, 2023)

Judgment reversed in part. Our client filed Fourth Amendment claims against several officers and the sheriff’s department for excessive force, which the district court dismissed by summary judgment. On appeal, we successfully reversed the dismissal with respect to two of the defendants, giving our client his day in court.

Hernandez v. United States, No. 6:19-cr-00258-ADA, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Waco Division (July 19, 2023)

Section 2255 Motion granted. After a plea of guilty, our client filed a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Ultimately, the district court granted relief in favor of our client.

Aleman v. Aleman, No. 14-22-00313-CV, in the Fourteenth District Court of Appeals in Houston, Texas (Opinion issued May 25, 2023)

Reversed and remanded in part. In an appeal of a Final Decree of Divorce, our client appealed the district court’s order granting summary judgment on our client’s claims for spousal maintenance. Agreeing with our position that the motion was insufficient, the court of appeals reversed the district court’s order dismissing our client’s claim for spousal maintenance and remanded for trial on that claim.

United States v. Phillips, No. 19-20251, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (March 22, 2023)

Life Sentence Vacated. After a jury trial, the jury found our client guilty of attempted robbery and a firearm offense, and he was sentenced to Life plus 20 years in Federal prison. On rehearing in the Fifth Circuit, we were able to get the life sentence vacated. The case is currently before the United States Supreme Court attempting to vacate the rest of the conviction.

United States v. Kim, No. 22-50827, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (COA granted March 22, 2023)

Certificate of Appealability Granted. After the U.S. district court denied our client’s Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and denied appealability, we filed a Motion for Certificate of Appealability with the Fifth Circuit on four grounds. The Fifth Circuit granted the COA on three of the four grounds, thus granting our client the right to appeal the district court’s denial of his 2255.

Largent v. Cassius Classic Cars & Exotics, LLC, No. 02-22-00043-CV, in the Second District Court of Appeals in Fort Worth, Texas (Opinion issued Feb. 23, 2023)

Reversed and remanded for trial. After the district court granted summary judgment against our client, awarding the plaintiff over $500,000 in damages, $45,000 in attorney’s fees, and conditional appellate attorney’s fees, the court of appeals found in favor of our client on every issue raised we raised in the brief. The court of appeals agreed the summary judgment evidence produced by the plaintiff was legally insufficient to support the damages award under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act (“DTPA”) and Breach of Contract claims. The court of appeals also agreed that the evidence was legally insufficient to support the award of attorney’s fees and the award of conditional appellate fees. The court of appeals reversed the entire judgment and remanded to the district court for further proceedings.

In re Stallworth, No. 13-21-00251-CV, in the Thirteenth District Court of Appeals in Corpus Christi, Texas (Opinion issued Feb. 2, 2023)

Final Decree of Divorce Reversed and remanded. After the a bench trial, the district court divided the martial assets, resulting in an unjust division of martial property. While the district court is given a great deal of discretion in dividing marital property in a divorce proceeding, that discretion is not absolute. Our client will receive a new trial to obtain a fair and just distribution of assets.

Barlow v. Richardson, No. 05-21-00844-CV, in the Fifth District Court of Appeals in Dallas, Texas (Opinion issued Jan. 17, 2023)

Reversed and rendered judgment in favor of our client award of attorney’s fees. Following a bench trial in a property dispute over a canine, the district court awarded attorney’s fees against our client. Challenging the attorney’s fees award as improper, the court of appeals agreed and reversed the award of attorney’s fees and rendered judgment in favor of our client.

Joe Martinez v. State of Texas, 10-20-00074-CR, Tenth District Court of Appeals in Waco, Texas (Opinion issued Apr. 27, 2022).

Vacated five counts and entered acquittal. Clouthier Law appealed after a jury convicted our client of eight counts of indecency with a child and sentenced him to 60 years’ imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The court of appeals agreed that the evidence was legally insufficient to support a conviction for counts one through five and vacated five counts, reducing our client’s sentence from 60 years to 20 years.

In re Elijah Stewart, No. 07-22-00079-CV (Tex. App.—Amarillo Apr. 27, 2022).

Vacated order of criminal contempt. In a family court enforcement proceeding, the district court found our client in criminal contempt and imposed a jail sentence. After first obtaining a bond to prevent our client from reporting to jail, we filed a writ of habeas corpus arguing illegal restraint based on a void order of contempt. The court of appeals agreed and found the order of contempt void on its face, therefore vacating the order and discharging our client from custody.

Foreman v. Foreman, No. 01-20-00589-CV, in the First District Court of Appeals in Houston, Texas (Opinion issued Mar. 29, 2022).

Affirmed judgment in favor of our client. After successfully obtaining judgment in her favor after a suit filed under the Declaratory Judgments Act, the losing party appealed. Clouthier Law successfully defended the appeal, resulting in affirming the judgment in favor of our client.

In the Matter of Gene Turk, an incapacitated person, No. 07-20-00222-CV, in the Seventh District Court of Appeals in Amarillo, Texas (Opinion issued Apr. 7, 2021)

Vacated and remanded Order of Guardianship. After a trial where our client sought guardianship of the person and estate of his father, the district court awarded guardianship to a different party. On appeal, the court of appeals found error in the order appointing guardianship, vacated the order, and remanded to the district court for further proceedings.

United States v. Ojin Kim, 988 F.3d 803 (5th Cir. 2021), in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Reversed restitution order and remanded. Our client signed a plea agreement and unconditionally waived his right to appeal. The white-collar offense resulted in a conviction of prison time as well as a restitution order exceeding $600,000. On appeal, we contended the appeal waiver should be held invalid due to the arbitrary calculation of the restitution. The Federal Court of Appeals agreed, finding our client was not precluded from appealing the restitution order because it was in excess of the statutory maximum. The court of appeals vacated the order and remanded to the district court, where the resulting restitution amount was decreased by almost 99% of the original order.

In re Gyanendra Patra, No. 01-20-00651-CV, in the First District Court of Appeals in Houston, Texas (Opinion issued Dec. 22, 2020)

Vacated order of criminal contempt. After the district court found our client in criminal contempt of a restraining order, committing him to county jail, Clouthier Law filed a writ of habeas corpus, arguing our client’s due process rights were violated because the order of commitment was insufficient. The court of appeals agreed, found our client was not validly confined, granted the writ, discharged our client’s commitment, and vacated the award of attorney’s fees against him from the order.

In re James W. Turner Construction, Ltd., No. 01-20-00356-CV, (Nov. 19, 2020)

Prevailed on defending a Petition for Writ of Mandamus. A Petition for Writ of Mandamus was filed challenging a denial of a motion to dismiss based on an alleged contractual forum selection clause. Counsel was hired to file a response and represent the party that prevailed on the motion to dismiss. After the Court of Appeals held oral argument, it denied the Petition for Writ of Mandamus in favor of our client.

The case was further appealed to the Supreme Court of Texas, where the Supreme Court requested our client file a response. Clouthier Law again prevailed.

Converse v. City of Kemah, 961 F.3d 771 (5th Cir. 2020), in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Reversed and remanded order granting a motion to dismiss. After the district court granted a motion to dismiss in favor of the police department on the grounds of qualified immunity, our client appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals of the Fifth Circuit. After oral argument before the Federal Circuit Court, the court found that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity, and reversed the order of dismissal regarding all the defendants, and remanded the case to the Federal District Court for trial.

In the Marriage of Jones v. Jones, No. 2019-85209 (309th Dist. Court, Harris County, Texas).

Default Judgment vacated. Petitioner obtained a default judgment in a divorce proceeding against our client, which contained provisions that negatively impacted him. Clouthier Law to filed a Motion for New Trial with the district court. After a hearing, Clouthier Law successfully had the judgment vacated, and the court ordered a new trial.

United States v. Dinh, No. H-20-2245, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas (Opinion issued Sep. 28, 2020).

Conviction vacated in Successive § 2255 Motion. After the Supreme Court decided U.S. v. Davis, Petitioner retained Clouthier Law to file a successive petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, asking the court to vacate his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Counsel first obtained permission to file the successive § 2255 from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Then after filing the motion in the district court, the district court vacated Petitioner’s conviction and sentence for § 924(c) which reduced his sentence by 60 months.

Sweet Water Well Service, LLC v. West Houston Airport Corp., No. 14-18-00596, in the Fourteenth District Court of Appeals, in Houston Texas (Opinion issued Aug. 27, 2020).

Reversed and remanded summary judgment order. The trial court entered a judgment against our client resulting from a Motion for Summary Judgment in an airplane lien case. Clouthier Law filed an appeal to the 14th Court of Appeals, arguing the trial court erred in entering a judgment against our client and that the judgment should be reversed. The court of appeals agree, reversed the judgment against our client and remanded to the district court for trial.

In re N.K., No. 09-20-00004-CV, in the Ninth District Court of Appeals in Beaumont, Texas (Opinion issued Mar 12, 2020).

Vacated order of criminal contempt. The County Court of Law #3 in Montgomery County, Texas found our client in criminal contempt of court for violating the geographical restriction in her SAPCR order after she moved her teen-aged son to Texas A&M University. The court ordered our client confined in jail for 130 days. Clouthier Law filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus alleging the SAPCR’s terms were too ambiguous to be enforceable by contempt. Within hours of filing the writ, the court of appeals issued bond for our client’s immediate release from county jail. Then, the court of appeals agreed with our argument and granted the petition for writ of habeas corpus, discharging our client’s confinement.

United States of America v. Franklin Joseph Ryle, 778 Fed. Appx. 598, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (Opinion issued 2019).

Granted Certificate of Appealability, Vacated Conviction. Defendant pleaded guilty of one count of deprivation of rights and one count of using or carrying a firearm in relation to a crime of violence in 2009. After filing a federal section 2255 petition in 2017 arguing that his 60-month sentence for the gun crime was unconstitutional, the district court denied the petition and denied a certificate of appealability. After the denial, Counsel fought to amend the motion based on the Supreme Court’s new decision in Sessions v. Dimaya, which found a similar statute unconstitutionally vague. The district court similarly denied defendant’s motion and refused to issue a certificate of appealability. Counsel filed a Motion for Certificate of Appealability with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. Subsequently, the Federal court of appeals granted the Certificate of Appealability and vacated our client’s 60-month sentence for the gun crime. Since he had served his sentence for the underlying conviction, our client was immediately released from incarceration and reunited with his family.