Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 38.001

Section 38.001 permits conditional appellate attorney’s fees when the claimant proves entitlement to reasonable fees.

Marsha Ellison D/B/A Ellison Lease Operating v. Samson Resources Co. Samson Lone Star Limited Partnership Samson Lone St · filed 2022-12-15

We hold that Concho conclusively established its entitlement to an award of conditional appellate attorney’s fees under § 38.001.

Section 38.001 requires a party to prevail on a covered cause of action and recover damages to obtain attorney’s fees.

Edifika Investments, LLC D/B/A Military Village Apartments v. Chain & Chain Construction, LLC · filed 2023-05-17

Because we have held that Chain was not entitled to summary judgment on its breach of contract and quantum meruit claims, it was not entitled to attorney’s fees under section 38.001.

Section 38.001 allows attorney’s fees when a party prevails on a covered claim and recovers damages.

Aristocles Enterprises, LLC dba The Plato Group v. KEU, Inc. · filed 2023-12-05

A party must meet two requirements to obtain an award of attorneys’ fees under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 38.001: (1) a party must prevail on a cause of action for which fees are recoverable, and (2) it must recover damages.

Section 38.001 requires an award of appellate attorney’s fees when trial fees are mandatory and reasonable appellate fees are proved.

Salinas Construction Technologies, Ltd. and Salinas and Sons, Inc. v. City of Corpus Christi · filed 2024-04-25(b)(8)

Because attorney’s fees were mandatory under § 38.001 and § 2251.043, the City was entitled to recover appellate attorney’s fees pursuant to the same.

Section 38.001 requires an award of reasonable appellate attorney’s fees when trial attorney’s fees are mandatory and proof of reasonable appellate fees is presented.

Mulch Matters, Inc. and Prime Trees, Inc. D/B/A Mulch Matters v. Toro Rojo, D/B/A Action Trucking Company · filed 2024-04-30(8)

If trial attorney’s fees are mandatory under section 38.001, appellate attorney’s fees are also mandatory when proof of reasonable fees is presented.

Section 38.001(b) permits reasonable attorney’s fees for a prevailing party on a breach-of-contract or sworn-account claim.

CST Permian, Inc. v. SW Fluids, LLC · filed 2024-05-09(b)

If either a claim for breach-of-contract or sworn-account is asserted, a trial court may award reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 38.001(b) (West Supp. 2023).

Section 38.001(8) permits attorney’s fees for a successful breach of contract claim, and a trial court has no discretion to deny them when the provision applies.

Hassen v. Demetriou · filed 2024-11-13(8)

If attorney’s fees are proper under 38.001(8), the trial court has no discretion to deny ... them.

Section 38.001 permits reasonable attorney’s fees for a breach-of-contract claim; a contingency-fee agreement alone does not justify increasing a supported lodestar amount.

CCR Roofing, LLC, and CCR Commercial Roofing, LLC v. Chase Garner and Richard Weston · filed 2025-02-05

Here, the fact that the attorney for Garner and Weston was operating under a contingency-fee agreement was already subsumed within the base lodestar calculation of $43,000. Moreover, the evidence in this record does not bring this case into one of the rare instances in which an upward adjustment of the lodestar result is warranted. Accordingly, Garner and Weston are limited to $43,000 in the attorney’s fees they can recover.

Section 38.001(7)-(8) allows a prevailing party on a Texas breach of contract claim or suit on sworn account to recover reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees.

DK Trading & Supply LLC v. Ja Dakis Capital LLC · filed 2025-03-19(7)-(8)

As the prevailing party on a Texas breach of contract claim and suit on sworn account, DK Trading is entitled to recover its reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees.

Section 38.001 permits recovery of attorney’s fees for breach of contract, but the evidence must support the full amount awarded.

In Re Estate of Robert S. Castleman v. . · filed 2025-08-27(b)(8)

Under section 38.001 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, a person may recover attorney’s fees in conjunction with a claim for services rendered, labor performed, or breach of contract. ... We therefore conclude that the evidence, while sufficient to support a finding of some amount of attorneys’ fees, was legally insufficient to support the entire $100,000 amount awarded by the jury.

An attorney’s-fee award under Section 38.001 must be reconsidered when the underlying contract claims are reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Grapevine Group Concrete Contractors, Inc. (Cross-Appellee) v. YC Partners, Ltd. D/B/A Yantis Company and Yantis Corpora · filed 2025-11-19

Further, because we reverse on those issues, we must also reverse and remand all awards of attorney’s fees (Issue No. 9).

Section 38.001(8) requires a claimant to prevail on a contract claim and recover damages to obtain attorney’s fees.

Zachary K. Mills, Robin Mills, and Edgegrove Homes, LLC v. Deborah Rupp and Edward Rupp · filed 2026-01-15(8)

Moreover, as stated above, there is no evidence supporting actual damages. Therefore, we must reverse the judgment’s $2,200 damage award, and render judgment that the Rupps take nothing as damages on its breach of contract claim. Consequently, we hold that the Rupps’ attorney fee award cannot be affirmed based on Chapter 38.

Section 38.001 does not allow attorney’s fees when the claimant cannot recover on the underlying quantum meruit claim.

Champion Food Service, Inc. and Champion Food Service 2, Inc. v. Proalamo Foods, L.L.C. and Procoastal, L.L.C. · filed 2026-06-19(b)(3)

Because we hold that Sellers cannot recover under quantum meruit as a matter of law, they may not recover attorney’s fees.

Section 38.001 permits recovery of attorneys' fees on a contract claim governed by Texas law.

United States for the use of Varco Pruden Buildings v. Reid & Gary Strickland Co. · filed 1999-01-04

Because Texas has a substantial relationship to the transaction, the district court did not err in finding that Strickland was entitled to its fees from Varco Pruden under Texas law. See TEX.CIV.PRAC. & REM.CODE ANN. § 38.001.

Section 38.001(8) requires an award of attorney’s fees on a valid contract claim when the fees are proved reasonable.

Goforth v. State · filed 2013-03-07(8)

The awarding of fees under section 38.001 is mandatory if there is proof of the reasonableness of the fees.

Section 38.001(8) leaves the trial court no discretion to deny attorney's fees when they are proper under the section.

Rudis Robles and Claudia Flores Robles v. Christopher Mann, Gwenda Mann, and Mann's MacHine, Inc. · filed 2014-12-29(8)

If attorney's fees are proper under section 38.001(8), the trial court has no discretion to deny them.

Section 38.001 permits reasonable attorney’s fees in a contract suit, even when the fee award exceeds the damages recovered.

Austin Capital Collision, LLC// Barbara Pampalone v. Barbara Pampalone// Cross-Appellee, Austin Capital Collision, LLC a · filed 2015-12-18(8)

Section 38.001 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code permits the recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees in a suit on an oral or written contract. ... Without citation to any authority, Stovall argues the award of attorney’s fees, which was “in excess of the actual judgment is not customary or reasonable for a breach of contract case.” We disagree, and after reviewing the record, we conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding $35,000 in attorney’s fees to HFC.

Section 38.001(8) does not authorize attorney's fees for a defendant who only defends a contract claim, brings no contract claim of its own, and does not prevail on a cause of action.

Pyramid Constructors, L.L.P. v. Sunbelt Controls, Inc. · filed 2005-02-28(8)

Chapter 38 provides no basis for Pyramid's point of error because the statute does not authorize recovery of attorney's fees by a defendant who only defends against a contract claim and presents no contract claim of its own, Energen Resources MAQ, Inc. v. Dalbosco , 23 S.W.3d 551, 558 (Tex.App.-Houston [1 st Dist.] 2000, pet. denied), and because Pyramid did not prevail on a cause of action in this proceeding, Green Int'l, Inc. v. Solis , 951 S.W.2d 384, 390 (Tex. 1997).

Section 38.001 does not allow a defendant who only defends against a claim and brings no claim of its own to recover attorney's fees or obtain an offset for them.

Rainbow Group, Ltd. v. Johnson · filed 2002-08-30(8)

Chapter 38, however, does not provide for the recovery of attorney's fees by a defendant who only defends against a plaintiff's claim and presents no claim of its own. ... Supercuts has not demonstrated that it is entitled to recover attorney's fees or to receive an offset.

Section 38.001 does not entitle a party to attorney's fees merely for successfully defending a contract claim.

Suzanne Gasparotto, Individually and D/B/A Onion Creek Ranch v. Gallagher Power Fence, Inc. · filed 2004-01-23

Although Gasparotto may have been entitled to attorney's fees under section 38.001 as the plaintiff, the statute does not entitle a party who successfully defends against a contractual lawsuit to recover attorney's fees.

Section 38.001 does not allow fees for defending an intertwined contract counterclaim when the claimant is not entitled to fees for prosecuting its own contract claim.

McNeil v. BMC Software Inc. · filed 2009-01-15(8)

As discussed above, McNeil failed to show that she was entitled to attorney’s fees for prosecution of her breach of contract claim, so the potential exception permitting recovery of attorney’s fees for defense of an intertwined counterclaim does not apply.

Section 38.001(8) does not allow a defendant to recover attorney’s fees for only defending a contract claim without bringing a contract claim of its own.

Petroleum Analyzer Company, L.P. v. Franek Olstowski, Individually and DBA Atomic Analytical Consulting Services and Ato · filed 2010-07-15(8)

Chapter 38 does not provide for the recovery of attorney’s fees by a defendant who only defends against a plaintiff’s contract claim and presents no contract claim of its own.

Section 38.001(8) does not allow attorney’s fees for successfully defending a contract claim.

Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP, Exxon Land Development, Inc. and Kingwood Place West Community Association, Inc. v · filed 2011-05-26(8)

Section 38.001(8) does not authorize recovery of attorneys’ fees for successfully defending a contract claim.

Section 38.001 permits attorney’s fees for a proven contract claim, but not merely for successfully defending against one.

Zhao v. the Hudgens Group, Inc. · filed 2011-06-07

However, it does not authorize an award of attorney’s fees for successfully defending against a breach of contract claim.

Section 38.001(8) does not allow defendants to recover attorney's fees for defending a contract claim without bringing their own contract claim.

Mark Polansky and Landrah Polansky v. Pezhman Berenji and John Berenjy · filed 2012-12-07(8)

Chapter 38 does not provide for recovery of attorneys' fees by defendants who only defend against a plaintiff's contract claim and do not present their own contract claim.

Section 38.001(8) does not allow a defendant to recover attorney’s fees merely for defending against a contract claim without bringing a claim of its own.

Jarvis v. Robert J. Peltier, Sr. and Calvin C. Smith · filed 2013-04-24(8)

Section 38.001(8) does not authorize recovery of attorney’s fees by a defendant who only defends against a plaintiff’s claim. ... Because Smith did not establish that he was entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law for attorney’s fees under Section 38.001(8), summary judgment for attorney’s fees based on that section was improper.

Section 38.001 allows a successful plaintiff in a breach-of-contract action to recover attorney’s fees from the defendant, but does not allow the defendant to recover fees from the plaintiff.

Power Reps, Inc., Bob Bergin and Jeff Jacquin v. Cy Cates, Power Reps Industrial, LLC, and Global Transformer Specialist · filed 2015-08-13

This point, however, has nothing to do with the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees to Cates, Industrial, and GTS, as those parties cannot recover fees in connection with that claim. See 1/2 Price Checks Cashed v. United Auto Ins. Co., 344 S.W.3d 378, 383 (Tex. 2011) (explaining that TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 38.001 establishes “one-way fee shift,” under which defendant is liable for successful plaintiff’s fees in breach-of-contract action, but reverse is not true).

Section 38.001 does not allow a defendant to recover attorney’s fees merely for successfully defending a breach of contract claim.

Riley v. Nick C. Caridas · filed 2020-12-29(8)

The defendants, as successful defendants, cannot recover attorney’s fees under section 38.001 or section 5.006 because they were not the parties who asserted the action.

Section 38.001 does not allow attorney’s fees solely for defending against a contract claim.

Beal v. Pruvit Ventures, Inc. · filed 2023-08-14(b)(8)

However, Beal was ineligible as a matter of law for purely defensive fees under Chapter 38.

Section 38.001(b)(8) allows attorney’s fees for a valid contract claim, but defeating another party’s contract claim does not qualify.

Sentry Insurance, a Mutual Company v. Bristow · filed 2025-07-24(b)(8)

To recover damages under Section 38.001(b)(8), a party must have a “valid claim” for a “contract.” Id. Thus, parties that prevail against a claim for breach of contract are not entitled to attorney’s fees.

Section 38.001 permits an award of attorney’s fees for a contract claim even when the claimant recovers under unjust enrichment.

Chitsey v. Jody Lockshin, Individually and Red River North Condominium Association Niemann & Niemann, L.L.P. An · filed 2001-11-01(8)

Appellees’ claim of unjust enrichment does not preclude the award of attorney’s fees under this section.

Section 38.001(8) does not provide attorney's fees in an action to enforce a covenant not to compete because the Covenant Not to Compete Act provides the exclusive remedies.

Albert Perez, Jose Maldonado, and Raul Gutierrez v. Texas Disposal Systems, Inc. · filed 2003-02-05(8)

Because we hold that the Act preempts an award of attorney's fees under any other statute, TDS is not entitled to recovery of its fees under section 38.001.

Section 38.001(8) does not authorize attorney’s fees for enforcing a covenant not to compete that the court judicially reforms.

Franlink, Inc D/B/A Link Staffing Services v. GJMS Unlimited, Inc., Gloria M. Salazar and Jaime Lee Salazar · filed 2013-04-25(8)

To allow an award of attorney’s fees under section 38.001(8), when the covenant was judicially reformed, would be contrary to the plain meaning of the more specific statute, section 15.51(c), which prohibits such an award.

Section 38.001(8) authorizes attorney’s fees for contract claims, but section 15.51(c) preempts that recovery for claims involving breach of a covenant not to compete.

D'Onofrio v. Vacation Publications, I · filed 2018-04-23(8)

While Texas law authorizes the recovery of attorneys’ fees for claims based on “an oral or written contract,”—as well as seven other categories of claims not relevant here—see Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 38.001(8), for claims involving the breach of a covenant not to compete, section 15.51(c) of the Texas Business and Commerce Code “preempts an award of [attorney’s] fees under ... any other law.”

Section 38.001 does not provide attorney's fees in maritime contract disputes because federal maritime law precludes its application.

Texas A&M Research Foundation v. Magna Transportation · filed 2003-07-09

We likewise conclude that the general rule of maritime law that parties bear their own costs, coupled with the need for uniformity in federal maritime law, precludes the application of state attorneys' fee statutes, such as § 38.001, to maritime contract disputes.

A party seeking attorney’s fees for a contract claim may obtain them at a later evidentiary hearing when the summary judgment motion did not present the fee claim.

Pat Trebesch and Nancy Trebesch v. Michael Morris and Belinda Morris · filed 2003-08-21(8)

We hold that because Appellees’ motion for summary judgment did not involve Appellees’ claim for attorneys’ fees, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in subsequently holding an evidentiary hearing on Appellees’ application for attorneys’ fees and in awarding attorneys’ fees to Appellees.

Section 38.001’s attorney’s fee recovery is subject to the Residential Construction Liability Act’s limitations in construction defect claims.

Diana Bankhead, M.D. v. Tim Maddox D/B/A Maddox Homes · filed 2004-03-17

The RCLA conflicts with Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, section 38.001 in that the RCLA contains limitations to the recovery of attorney's fees.

Section 38.001 does not allow recovery of attorney's fees incurred in a separate, related action that was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Michael G. Brown, M.D. v. Donn C. Fullenweider, Individually and as Representative of J. D. 'Bucky' Allshouse J. Michael · filed 2004-05-04

We are neither aware of, nor do the parties direct our attention to, any Texas statutory or case law that supports Fullenweider's position that he is entitled to recover attorney's fees for services rendered in a completely separate, albeit related, action. ... The trial court, therefore, improperly awarded Fullenweider those attorney's fees attributable to the Montgomery County case and appeals.

Section 38.001(8) allows a plaintiff who prevails on a promissory estoppel claim to recover attorney’s fees.

Corpus Christi Day Cruise, LLC v. Christus Spohn Health System Corporation · filed 2012-07-05(8)

In light of the statute’s mandate that we construe it liberally, see TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 38.005 (West 2008), we agree with the majority of courts and conclude that attorney’s fees are available under subsection 38.001(8) for a plaintiff prevailing on a promissory estoppel theory.

Section 38.001(8) permits recovery of attorney’s fees on a promissory estoppel claim.

Turner v. NJN Cotton Company · filed 2015-11-30(8)

In any event, as far as Turner’s claim that attorney’s fees are not recoverable as relates to NJN’s promissory estoppel claim, the weight of authority in Texas is that attorney’s fees are recoverable under Section 38.001(8) of the Texas Civil Practices & Remedies Code in a promissory estoppel claim.

Section 38.001(8) entitles a prevailing party on a promissory estoppel claim to reasonable attorney’s fees.

Medfinmanager, LLC v. Salas · filed 2021-08-25(8)

Consequently, we hold the trial court erred by denying fees to MedFin under Section 38.001(8) as the prevailing party on its promissory estoppel claim.

Section 38.001 permits reasonable attorney’s fees for a successful promissory estoppel claim.

The Bogoraz Law Firm v. Apogee Capital Fund 5, LLC · filed 2025-03-27(b)(8)

Indeed, the Fifth Circuit has construed Section 38.001 to permit recovery of attorney’s fees on a successful promissory estoppel claim, see Preload Tech., 696 F.2d at 1095 & n.23, and the weight of authority in Texas permits an award of attorney’s fees under Section 38.001(8) of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code for a promissory estoppel claim.

Section 38.001 permits attorney’s fees for a construction trust fund misapplication claim seeking payment for labor or materials when the claimant also recovers on a related contract claim.

Direct Value, LLC and Martin F. Cody, Jr. v. Stock Building Supply, LLC · filed 2012-11-15(1)–(3)

Here, unlike the situation in Larrison, SBS sought attorney’s fees pursuant to section 38.001 and, as in Perry, recovered on both its breach of contract claim against Direct and its misapplication of trust funds claim against Cody, jointly and severally. ... Based upon this rule, as well as sound legal reasoning, we adopt the position of the Austin Court of Appeals and find that the trial court did not err in awarding SBS its attorney’s fees incurred in the process of litigating its claim for misapplication of funds.

Section 38.001 does not authorize attorney’s fees for a Construction Trust Fund Act claim, even when the same facts could support a claim listed in section 38.001.

Dudley Construction, Ltd., Richard Mark Dudley, and Hartford Fire Insurance Company v. Act Pipe and Supply, Inc. · filed 2018-04-06

We conclude that neither the TCTFA nor Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 38.001 allow for attorney’s fees for a successful TCTFA claim.

Section 38.001(b)(8) allows recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees for a claim on an oral or written contract.

BITX Transportation Services LLC v. Forward Transportation Services LLC · filed 2021-10-27(b)(8)

BITX would also be entitled to its attorney’s fees under Texas law.

Section 38.001(b) includes oral and written contract claims among those eligible for attorney’s fees; the court required a fee provision in the contract to recover them.

Luis Alberto Castaneda and Esther Alicia Castaneda - Adversary Proceeding · filed 2022-01-26(b)

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 38.001(b) sets forth the claims available for attorney’s fees, which include claims for services, performed labor, furnished material, freight or express overcharges, lost or damaged freight or express, killed or injured stock, a sworn account or an oral or written contract. There is no dispute that the Castanedas breached the Loan Agreement, however, that contract did not provide for attorneys’ fees. Accordingly, the Plaintiff cannot claim a right to attorneys’ fees on the basis of either breach of contract under Texas law.

Section 38.001(b)(8) permits recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees when a claimant prevails on a contract claim and recovers damages; a court must award fees supported by uncontroverted evidence.

Albers v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company · filed 2024-07-18(b)(8)

We conclude from the record before us that Albers prevailed on his breach of contract claim against State Farm, there was uncontroverted evidence of presentment of the claim under Chapter 38, State Farm did not challenge the amount, reasonableness, or necessity of the fees presented, and the trial court erred in denying a recovery of attorney’s fees.

Section 38.001(8) permits recovery of reasonable attorney's fees, in addition to a valid claim and costs, for an oral or written contract claim.

Homesteaders Life Company v. Williams · filed 2025-03-11(8)

Under Texas law, “[a] person may recover reasonable attorney's fees from an individual or organization . . . , in addition to the amount of a valid claim and costs, if the claim is for ... an oral or written contract.” TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 38.001(8); ... On this record, the Court finds that the total requested fees of $9,350.00 are reasonable and necessary.

Section 38.001(8) permits recovery of reasonable attorney’s fees in addition to a valid claim and costs when the claim is for an oral or written contract.

Crum v. CAAPS Investments LLC · filed 2025-08-28(8)

Under Texas law, “[a] person may recover reasonable attorney’s fees from an individual or organization . . . in addition to the amount of a valid claim and costs, if the claim is for . . . an oral or written contract.” TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 38.001(8); ... The Court finds that the total requested fees of $37,539.31 are reasonable and necessary and that Plaintiff is entitled to said fees.

Section 38.001 does not authorize attorney’s fees for fraud in a real estate transaction, negligence, or negligent misrepresentation.

Main Place Custom Homes, Inc. and Ron Smith v. Richard Honaker and Ginger Honaker · filed 2006-03-23

Mental anguish damages are not recoverable for breach of contract, Latham v. Castillo , 972 S.W.2d 66, 72 (Tex. 1998), and attorney’s fees are not recoverable for the Honakers’ fraud in a real estate transaction, negligence, and negligent misrepresentation claims, see Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 38.001 (Vernon 1997).

Section 38.001(8) allows a prevailing party on a contract claim to recover attorney’s fees paid on its behalf when it is obligated to reimburse the payer.

DPRS 15th Street, Inc. v. Texas Skyline · filed 2014-08-13(8)

The trial court entered conclusions of law that Pecos was entitled to attorney’s fees as the prevailing party in a breach of contract claim under section 38.001 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code and that Texas Skyline was entitled to attorney’s fees as a derivative claimant under sections 153.401 and 153.405 of the Business Organizations Code. ... Woerner contends that Pecos was not entitled to recover attorney’s fees because it did not pay the attorney’s fees, which were paid by Texas Skyline. ... The trial court issued findings of fact that Texas Skyline retained attorneys on behalf of Pecos, that Pecos was required to—and agreed to—reimburse Texas Skyline for all fees and expenses incurred on behalf of Pecos under the terms of the partnership agreement, and that Pecos and Texas Skyline incurred reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees. ... These unchallenged findings and this evidence support the trial court’s conclusions of law regarding attorney’s fees, and we cannot conclude on this record that they were erroneous as a matter of law.

Section 38.001(4) does not authorize attorney fees against a collection agency when the shipper does not claim the carrier’s freight charges were overcharges.

Progressive Transportation, LLC v. Republic National Industries of Texas, LP, and Republic Corporation · filed 2015-02-05(4)

Given the history and common application of the provision at issue here, we hold that Section 38.001(4) does not authorize recovery from a collection agency for freight charges made by a carrier when the shipper does not complain that the carrier’s charges constituted overcharges.

A party must object in the trial court to a fee award it claims section 38.001 does not authorize; the objection is neither jurisdictional nor fundamental error.

Enzo Investments, LP v. White · filed 2015-06-04(8)

White sought recovery of attorney’s fees under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 38.001(8), which provides that “[a] person may recover reasonable attorney’s fees from an individual or corporation, in addition to the amount of a valid claim and costs, if the claim is for . . . an oral or written contract.” ... We agree with the reasoning of the Thirteenth Court of Appeals in Shiba that this is neither a complaint of fundamental error nor a jurisdictional matter, and we continue to follow our own precedent that the complaint must be preserved in the trial court.

An objection that section 38.001 does not authorize attorney’s fees against a limited liability company must be raised specifically in the trial court to be considered on appeal.

Texas Construction Specialists, L.L.C. v. Ski Team Vip, L.L.C. · filed 2022-03-03(8)

However, because TCS failed to preserve its complaint that Ski Team’s attorney’s fees are unrecoverable under section 38.001, these fees were recoverable.

Section 38.001 does not require proof that an attorney is licensed to practice law in Texas to recover attorney’s fees in a breach of contract case.

Gharbi v. Hemmasi · filed 2015-08-10

There is no such requirement in the statute providing for recovery of attorneys’ fees in a breach of contract case. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 38.001-.002.

Section 38.001(8) makes attorney’s fees mandatory for a breach-of-contract claim and permits a licensed attorney representing himself to recover them.

Nelson v. Safeco Insurance Company of Indiana · filed 2021-03-16(8)

Thus, in addition to the fact that Mr. Nelson, were he the sole plaintiff, would be entitled to an automatic award of fees pursuant to both Chapter 38 and Section 542 because he is a licensed attorney, the Nelsons are also entitled to automatic attorneys’ fees because Mrs. Nelson is represented by an attorney in this lawsuit.

Section 38.001 does not categorically bar attorney’s fees when a limited partnership is involved.

Revolution Retail Systems, LLC v. Sentinel Technologies, Inc. · filed 2015-10-30

Tidel‟s argument that Revolution is not entitled to recover its attorneys‟ fees because Section 38.001 does not apply to limited partnerships is clever, but I reject it under the circumstances here.

Section 38.001 permits attorney’s fees against an individual liable for a contract breach, even when that liability arises from the individual’s status as a general partner.

Mansour Al-Saud v. Youtoo Media,L.P. · filed 2018-10-22

It does not make the recovery of such fees dependent on the theory of liability imposed. Instead it looks solely to whether that party is an individual or corporation. Whether Wyatt is derivatively or directly liable, he is still an individual. We will therefore affirm the judgment requiring Wyatt to pay fees for the breach of the LOI.

Before September 1, 2021, section 38.001 did not allow recovery of breach of contract attorney’s fees against a limited liability company.

Target Corporation v. D&H Properties, LLC · filed 2021-11-23

But because D&H is a limited liability company, Target may not recover attorney’s fees for its breach of contract claim under section 38.001.

For suits filed before September 1, 2021, section 38.001 did not authorize attorney’s fees for a breach of contract claim against a limited liability company.

AdvanTech Construction Systems, LLC and Luis G. Higareda v. Michalson Builders, Inc. and Michael Czapski · filed 2023-01-24

Accordingly, section 38.001 does not authorize attorney’s fees for Michalson’s breach of contract claim against AdvanTech.

The version of Section 38.001 in force when the suit was filed did not allow recovery of breach-of-contract attorney’s fees from an LLC.

Drywall Elements, LLC v. Edward Wolff & Associates, LLC · filed 2022-03-30

Plaintiff cannot seek attorney’s fees for breach of contract from an LLC under Chapter 38; the version of TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 38.001 in force at the time this suit was filed did not permit recovery of attorney’s fees from an LLC [Dkt. 25 at 8].

Section 38.001’s amendment permitting attorney’s fees against an organization applies to actions commenced on or after September 1, 2021; earlier actions are governed by the prior version.

Ramey & Schwaller,LLP v. the Document Group, Inc. · filed 2022-05-19

The legislature amended Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 38.001 effective September 1, 2021, to permit recovery of attorney’s fees from an individual or “organization,” as defined by Business Organizations Code section 1.002. ... This suit was filed prior to that amendment taking effect, and so we apply the version that was in effect when this action was commenced.

The version of section 38.001 in effect before September 1, 2021, does not allow recovery of attorney’s fees from a limited liability company in a breach-of-contract action.

American Midstream, LLC v. Rainbow Energy Marketing Corporation · filed 2023-04-13

This Court has previously held that Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 38.001 as it existed when this suit was filed does not authorize the recovery of attorney’s fees in a breach-of-contract action against a limited liability ... company.7 ... We decline Rainbow’s request that we overrule this precedent.

Before the September 1, 2021 amendment, section 38.001 did not permit recovery of attorney’s fees against a limited liability company.

Pioneer Emerald Pointe, LLC v. Texmenian Contractors, LLC D/B/A Red Carpet Cleaning and Merge Management, LLC D/B/A Emer · filed 2023-06-13

Although section 38.001 authorizes recovery of attorney’s fees for claims arising out of written contracts, sworn accounts, or quantum meruit, it did not permit recovery against a limited liability company when this suit was filed.

For suits filed before September 1, 2021, Section 38.001 does not permit an award of attorney’s fees against a limited liability company.

Plan B. Holdings, LLC CIPE Real Estate Solutions, LLC And Cheryl Cox v. RSLLP, F/K/A Reed & Scardino LLP · filed 2023-10-06

Texas cases construing the older version of Section 38.001 have uniformly held that attorney’s fees are not allowed against LLCs under that statutory language. ... Accordingly, the trial court erred in awarding attorney’s fees against CIPE and Plan B.

Under the version of Section 38.001 applicable before the 2021 amendment, a party could not recover attorney’s fees on a contract claim from a limited liability company.

Repsol Oil and Gas USA, LLC as Successor of Talisman Energy USA Inc, Statoil Texas Onshore Properties, LLC, and Statoil · filed 2023-12-27

Regardless of whether Talisman may be liable for attorneys’ fees under the Business Organizations Code, the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, by its plain language, precludes Matrix’s recovery of such fees from a limited liability company on a contract claim.

For a suit filed in 2018, section 38.001 did not allow recovery of attorney’s fees against a limited liability company.

Gulf View Private Investment, Inc. F/K/A Whitesell International, Inc., Neil Whitesell, Vincent Costantino, Adam Arters, · filed 2024-10-16(a)(8)

We conclude that our holding in 8305 Broadway applies and that the final judgment could not have ordered Innova, as a limited liability company, to pay GC System’s attorneys’ fees under its breach of contract claim.

A trust can waive its argument that section 38.001 excludes it from attorney’s fees by waiting until remand to raise it.

Gibbons-Markey v. Texas Medical Liability Trust (In Re Gibbons-Markey) · filed 2007-08-30

By failing to do so, TMLT effectively waived the right to argue that the Trust is now excluded from the award of attorney’s fees.

Section 38.001 provides attorney’s fees to a prevailing breach of contract claimant, and an arbitration agreement cannot eliminate that right without an effective waiver.

BONDED BUILDERS HOME WARRANTY ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS, INC. D/B/A Bonded Builders Warranty Group, Appellant v. SMI · filed 2016-04-21

Also, section 38.001 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code provides for recovery of attorney’s fees by a claimant prevailing in a breach of contract action. ... On this record, we conclude the trial court erred by declining to sever the arbitration provision’s objectionable limitation on appellees’ statutory rights respecting recovery of attorney’s fees and proceed with enforcement of the remaining provisions.

Section 38.001(6) does not permit recovery of attorney’s fees for the injury or death of pet dogs kept solely as companions because they are not “stock.”

Palfreyman v. Becky Gaconnet and Leslie Jones · filed 2018-09-27(6)

We conclude the term “stock” in section 38.001(6) does not include pet dogs.

Section 38.001 does not authorize attorney’s fees for an equitable-contribution claim.

Junior v. John K. Broussard, Prince's Hamburgers No. 5, L.L.C., P.H. 2003, L.P., PHSW Limited Partnership, Br · filed 2018-11-15

The statute does not authorize recovery of attorney’s fees incurred in successfully pursuing an equitable-contribution claim, nor does Orr contend otherwise.

Section 38.001’s allowance for costs does not cover fees for an expert witness retained by a party.

12636 Research Ltd. Hsu Realty Company, Inc. And Chi-Kao Hsu// Indian Brothers, Inc. D/B/A Oak Liquor Cabinet v. Indian · filed 2021-02-05

As to the expert fees, however, we address the Hsu Parties’ separate argument that statutes that authorize recovering “costs,” as both Sections 37.009 and 38.001 do, do not thereby authorize recovering expert fees. ... We therefore conclude that the $7,112.50 for expert fees was unrecoverable.