Jason E. Williams - Lawyer in Houston, TX

Acommercial trial attorney with a focus on energy, corporate fiduciary andsecurities, and construction litigation, Jason Williams has significantfirst-chair trial and arbitration experience and has argued as lead counselbefore the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Workingas a mechanical engineer prior to attending The University of Houston LawCenter, he gained unique insights that have help to make him invaluable to hisclients facing technology-related disputes. His construction law experienceincludes construction defect claims, design errors and omissions claims,contractor termination matters, and construction delays. He also hassubstantial experience in securities and fiduciary litigation, includingdirectors and officers liability, breach of fiduciary duty, derivative claims,and business divorces. His work in energy disputes, focuses on drilling,pipelines, refining, energy trading, and trade secrets.

Recentcase highlights:

• Defendedan oilfield specialty services company against claims of aiding and abettingbreach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and theft of trade secrets brought by a formercustomer? a much larger, publicly traded entity alleging $65 million indamages. Attacking the plaintiffs own internal controls and accountingpractices, and drawing upon substantial knowledge of internal controls overfinancial reporting and public company accounting rules, a good settlement wassecured before trial and before the plaintiff obtained a substantial verdictagainst the remaining co-defendants.
• Representedminority shareholder of a closely held petroleum products marketing andterminaling company against the companys single dominant shareholder and boardof directors. The allegations included breach of contract, fraud, unjustenrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty both as direct and derivative causesof action. The client alleged that the company breached its promise to buy backhis shares at a certain value and that the companys directors breached theirfiduciary duties to him by engaging in conflicting interest transactionsunder Georgia law. After the presiding judge denied the defendants motion todismiss, the case settled for a confidential amount.
• Defendedthe manufacturer and supplier of a mechanical vertical inclination well surveytool known as a Wireless Drift Indicator against breach of warranty claims. Theplaintiff, a bankrupt operator, had drilled a deviated hole that had to besidetracked. After analyzing the drilling reports and interviewing and deposingrig personnel regarding key events, it was determined that the operator failedto follow the survey tool operating instructions and made critical errorsduring drilling and in its handling of the bottom hole assembly. The case settledfavorably shortly after arguing the summary judgment motion.
• Defendeda major financial institution after it sold a large commercial tract. Thepurchaser later accused the institution of fraudulently concealing defects inthe property and demanded $12 million in damages. Established in the depositionof the purchasers contractor that the contractor warned the purchaser aboutthe defects and through hard-fought written discovery the purchaser disclosedthe defects to an insurer well before the purchasers supposed discovery ofthem. The case settled for fraction of the amount sought.
• Representednon-destructive testing and inspection company against a competitors claim oftortious interference and theft of trade secrets. The case involved a novel issueof federal jurisdiction over disputes related to foreign arbitration agreementsunder the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign ArbitralAwards. Obtained dismissal of all claims. In a subsequent suit against the samecompetitor, obtained summary judgment against competitor, securing $2.1 millionin damages.
• Representeda municipal utility district against an engineering firm seeking damages ofover $1 million related to the alleged defective design of a flood controldetention pond which suffered a major structural wall failure. As part of therepresentation, assisted the client in developing a plan for the replacement ofthe entire detention pond and the hiring of a new engineering firm. Securedsettlement in excess of the engineering firms policy limits.