civil conspiracy claim in Texas

2008Massey v. Armco Steel Co., 652 S.W.2d 932, 934 (Tex.1983). [17] The majority states that the burden was on Myrad "to raise a fact issue regarding each element of its [surplus] claim." Faced with a no-evidence motion, however, the nonmovant need only address the elements of its claim that the movant specifically addresses in its motion.

2008Massey v. Armco Steel Co., 652 S.W.2d 932, 934 (Tex.1983).

2022See Tri, 162 S.W.3d at 556 ; Times Herald Printing Co. v. A.H.

2022First United Pentecostal Church of Beaumont v. Parker, 514 S.W.3d 214, 222 (Tex. 2017) (citing Tri v. J.T.T., 162 S.W.3d 552, 556 (Tex. 2005)).

2026“Civil conspiracy requires an underlying tort that has caused damages.” Id. at 142 (citing Tilton v. Marshall, 925 S.W.2d 672, 681 (Tex. 1996)); see 1st & Trinity Super Majority, LLC v. Milligan, 657 S.W.3d 349 , 372 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2022, no pet.) (“[T]o prevail on a civil conspiracy claim, a plaintiff must show that the defendant was liable for some underlying tort.”).

2019Because civil conspiracy is a derivative tort that “depends on participation in some underlying tort,” we conclude that the applicable statute of limitations must coincide with that of the “underlying tort for which the plaintiff seeks to hold at least one of the named defendants liable.” See Tilton v. Marshall, 925 S.W.2d 672, 681 (Tex. 1996) (describing the nature of a civil conspiracy claim).

2016See Trammell Crow Co. No. 60 v. Harkinson, 944 S.W.2d 631, 635 (Tex. 1997); Tilton, 925 S.W.2d at 681 ; Miller, 229 S.W.3d at 381 .

2008Id . (citing Trammell Crow Co. No. 60 v. Harkinson , 944 S.W.2d 631, 635 (Tex. 1997)).

2015Fork Advisors, LLC v. SunGard Consulting Servs., LLC, 437 S.W.3d 917, 921 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2014, pet. filed). 59 Id. 60 See Lipsky, 411 S.W.3d at 552 (observing that there is uncertainty in the law about whether Texas recognizes an aiding and abetting cause of action separately from a civil conspiracy claim and holding that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the TCPA motion to dismiss when the plaintiff did not discuss the elements or facts of its aiding and abetting claim or argue that the claim could survive the dismissal of the conspiracy claim). 34 6.

2014Finally, piercing the corporate veil and alter ego are “means of imposing on an individual a corporation’s liability for an underlying cause of action;” “these theories … are not substantive causes of action.” Phillips v. United Heritage Corp., 319 S.W.3d 156, 158-59 (Tex. 3 We note that some uncertainty exists as to “whether Texas recognizes a cause of action of ‘aiding and abetting’ separately from a civil conspiracy claim.” In re Lipsky, 411 S.W.3d at 552 n.26.

2022First United Pentecostal Church of Beaumont v. Parker, 514 S.W.3d 214, 222 (Tex. 2017).

2022First United Pentecostal Church of Beaumont v. Parker, 514 S.W.3d 214, 222 (Tex. 2017) (citing Tri v. J.T.T., 162 S.W.3d 552, 556 (Tex. 2005)).

2020Such a result seems inconsistent with the Texas Supreme Court’s recent statement that “a civil conspiracy claim is connected to the underlying tort and survives or fails alongside it.” Agar Corp., Inc. v. Electro Circuits Int’l, LLC, 580 S.W.3d 136 , 141 (Tex. 2019) (citing NME Hosps., Inc. v. Rennels, 994 S.W.2d 142, 148 (Tex. 1999)).

2019Such a result seems inconsistent with the Texas Supreme Court’s recent statement that “a civil conspiracy claim is connected to the underlying tort and survives or fails alongside it.” Agar Corp., Inc. v. Electro Circuits Int’l, LLC, 580 S.W.3d 136 , 141 (Tex. 2019) (citing NME Hosps., Inc. v. Rennels, 994 S.W.2d 142, 148 (Tex. 1999)).

2019Chu v. Hong, 249 S.W.3d 441 , 444–45 (Tex. 2008); Carroll v. Timmers Chevrolet, Inc., 592 S.W.2d 922, 925 (Tex. 1979).

2019Chu v. Hong, 249 S.W.3d 441 , 444–45 (Tex. 2008); Carroll v. Timmers Chevrolet, Inc., 592 S.W.2d 922, 925 (Tex. 1979).

2009See Lesikar v. Rappeport, 33 S.W.3d 282, 302 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2000, pet. denied).

2009See Lesikar v. Rappeport , 33 S.W.3d 282, 302 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2000, pet. denied).

2007Hunt v. Baldwin, 68 S.W.3d 117, 133 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, no pet.).

2007Hunt v. Baldwin , 68 S.W.3d 117,133 (Tex. App. C Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, no pet.).

2016Agency, 63 S.W.3d 841, 864 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, pet. denied) (“[T]o prevail on a civil conspiracy claim, the plaintiff must show that the defendant was liable for some underlying tort”).

2014Agency, 63 S.W.3d 841, 864 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, pet. denied) (“[T]o prevail on a civil conspiracy claim, the plaintiff must show that the defendant was liable for some underlying tort.”).

2013The elements of a civil conspiracy claim are “(1) two or more persons; (2) an objective to be accomplished; (3) a meeting of the minds on the objective [or course of action]; (4) one or more unlawful, overt acts in furtherance of the objective; and, (5) damages as a proximate result.” San Antonio Credit Union v. O’Connor, 115 S.W.3d 82, 90-91 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2003, pet. denied) (citing Operation Rescue-Nat’l v. Planned Parenthood of Hous. & Se.

2013The elements of a civil conspiracy claim are “(1) two or more persons; (2) an objective to be accomplished; (3) a meeting of the minds on the objective [or course of action]; (4) one or more unlawful, overt acts in furtherance of the objective; and, (5) damages as a proximate result.” San Antonio Credit Union v. O’Connor, 115 S.W.3d 82 , 90–91 (Tex. App.— San Antonio 2003, pet. denied) (citing Operation Rescue–Nat’l v. Planned Parenthood of Hous. & Se.

2026Int’l, LLC, No. 14-13-00113-CV, 2014 WL 3512836 , at *4 n.6 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] July 15, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.) (citing Hart v. Moore, 952 S.W.2d 90, 98 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1997, pet. denied)). 11 Given the disposition of the preceding issues, we need not address the Velanis’ other issues challenging the award of damages and attorney’s fees to Dhanji.

2014See Hart v. Moore, 952 S.W.2d 90, 98 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1997, pet. denied). 9 responses to Dr. Myung’s motion for summary judgment and in its appellate briefs.

2019See Williams v. Khalaf, 802 S.W.2d 651, 654 (Tex. 1990) (“[Torts] not expressly covered by a limitation provision nor expressly held by this court to be governed by a different provision would presumptively be a ‘trespass’ for limitations purposes.”).

2019See Williams v. Khalaf, 802 S.W.2d 651, 654 (Tex. 1990) (“[Torts] not expressly covered by a limitation provision nor expressly held by this court to be governed by a different provision would presumptively be a ‘trespass’ for limitations purposes.”).

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019See id. at 812–13.

2019See id. at 812–13.

2019Tovrea Land & Cattle Co. v. Linsenmeyer, 412 P.2d 47, 63 (Ariz. 1966).

2019Tovrea Land & Cattle Co. v. Linsenmeyer, 412 P.2d 47, 63 (Ariz. 1966).

2019See, e.g., Jeanes v. Hamby, 685 S.W.2d 695, 699 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1984, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (holding that limitations in a civil conspiracy claim for fraud ran from the conspiracy’s last overt act rather than with the underlying fraud claim’s accrual).

2019See, e.g., Jeanes v. Hamby, 685 S.W.2d 695, 699 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1984, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (holding that limitations in a civil conspiracy claim for fraud ran from the conspiracy’s last overt act rather than with the underlying fraud claim’s accrual).

2019We have said a proven civil conspiracy means “each of [the] defendants in error is responsible for all acts done by any of the conspirators in furtherance of the unlawful combination.” State v. Standard Oil Co., 107 S.W.2d 550, 559 (Tex. 1937).

2019We have said a proven civil conspiracy means “each of [the] defendants in error is responsible for all acts done by any of the conspirators in furtherance of the unlawful combination.” State v. Standard Oil Co., 107 S.W.2d 550, 559 (Tex. 1937).

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2019Rather than apply the residual limitations period, the courts of appeals that have considered the issue have held civil conspiracy falls under the two-year statute of limitations applied to suits for trespass in section 16.003 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.1 Agar contends that these cases are wrong and that they misunderstand the nature of a civil conspiracy claim. 1 See, e.g., Tucker v. Bedgood, 2016 WL 7011584 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Dec. 1, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.); Archer v. Allison, 2015 WL 7889910 , at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 3, 2015, pet. denied) (mem.

2012In Schlumberger Well Surveying Corp. v. Nortex Oil & Gas Corp., 435 S.W.2d 854 (Tex.1968), Chief Justice Calvert set forth the elements as follows, “A conspiracy to defraud on the part of two or more persons means a common purpose, supported by a concerted action to defraud, that each has the intent to do it, and that it is common to each of them, and each has the understanding that the other has that purpose.” Id. at 857 .

2012In Schlumberger Well Surveying Corp. v. Nortex Oil & Gas Corp., 435 S.W.2d 854 (Tex.1968), Chief Justice Calvert set forth the elements as follows, “A conspiracy to defraud on the part of two or more persons means a common purpose, supported by a concerted action to defraud, that each has the intent to do it, and that it is common to each of them, and each has the understanding that the other has that purpose.” Id. at 857 .

2024See Agar Corp. v. Electro Circuits Int’l, LLC, 580 S.W.3d 136 , 140–41 (Tex. 2019); see also Chu v. Hong, 249 S.W.3d 441 , 444–45 (Tex. 2008) (holding that, in civil conspiracy, 3 In their live pleading, the Hammonds identify this claim as “Civil Conspiracy and Aiding & Abetting.” They then alleged elements consistent with a civil conspiracy claim.

2024See Agar Corp. v. Electro Circuits Int’l, LLC, 580 S.W.3d 136 , 140–41 (Tex. 2019); see also Chu v. Hong, 249 S.W.3d 441 , 444–45 (Tex. 2008) (holding that, in civil conspiracy, 3 In their live pleading, the Hammonds identify this claim as “Civil Conspiracy and Aiding & Abetting.” They then alleged elements consistent with a civil conspiracy claim.

2019Four Bros., 217 S.W.3d at 668 .

2018Boat Works v. Tesoro Petroleum Cos., Inc., 217 S.W.3d 653, 668 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2006, pet. denied) (explaining “to prevail on a civil conspiracy claim, the plaintiff must show the defendant was liable for some underlying tort”).