|TX||Eligible To Practice In Texas||2000||07/28/2017|
|Partner||Simon Herbert McClelland & Stiles, LLP||2006 - Present|
|Clerk||Honorable Leslie Brock Yates, Sr Associate Justice on the 14th Court of Appeals||2001 - 2001|
|Associate||Winstead, PC||2001 - 2006|
|Briefing Attorney||Fourteenth Court Of Appeals||2000 - 2001|
|Association name||Position name||Duration|
|State Bar of Texas||Fellow||2013 - Present|
|Houston Bar Association||Fellow||2012 - Present|
|American Bar Association||N/A||N/A|
|Texas Trial Lawyers Association||N/A||N/A|
|General Metal Fabricating Corp. v. Stergiou||On second motion for rehearing, reversed and remanded|
|General Metal Fabricating Corp. v. Stergiou||Appellate court affirmed trial court's summary judgment ruling that Rule 11 agreement was enforceable|
|Melawer v. Total Aircraft||$82,000 Judgment for client, including $25K in sanctions against attorney and attorney's client for discovery abuses and appellate attorney's fees, etc. Affirmed by court of appeals and 100% recovery against plaintiff/counter-defendant.|
|See all legal cases|
|Houston Chronicle||Stop Giving Our Rights Away: The Reality of Tort Reform is Unfair System||2011|
|36 ABA Preview, 3, 158-63||Does the Sherman Act Recognize a "Price-Squeezing" Claim Where the Only Duty to Deal Arises from a Regulatory Scheme||2008|
|18 The Appellate Advocate||Pre-Dispute Jury Waivers Now Enforceable in Texas||2005|
|Houston Chronicle||Beware Bait-and-Switch by Prop. 12 Supporters||2003|
|41 SOUTH TEX. L. REV. 1101||The Fourth Amendment's Exclusionary Rule - Judicial Remedy or Constitutional Mandate: Is There Room for the "Good Faith" Exception?||2000|
|2004 HOUS. BUS. J. 26||How Can an Owner Protect its Company from a Jury of its Peers?||N/A|
|South Texas College of Law||Doctor of Jurisprudence/Juris Doctor (J.D.)||N/A||2000|
|University of Houston, main campus||Political Science||BS - Bachelor of Science||1997|
Posted by Ken
I became acquainted with Paul as he was engaged by my business partner (and fellow officer in our corporation), to represent him in a suit. The suit was as a result of the plaintiffs choosing to join the officers in addition to their alleged claims against our companies. It was particularly offensive with DTPA claims which were false - and the inclusion of many parties that simply had no involvement with any of the facts and circumstances.
Our D&O provider placed a limitation on the number of counselors our policy would be able to cover. My partner and I chose a common sense approach of instructing my own counselor (engaged in my capacity as an Officer) to attempt to work collaboratively with Paul on a solution which was amenable to the insurer and their limits of coverage, while ensuring that work done by Paul was not wasted or not leveraged for the benefit of the end goal - making the suit go away.
I was genuinely impressed by both men's capacity to put the client first and find a solution which was a win:win to their needs an in line with the insurer's requirements. It would have been perfectly easy for all involved to look out after their own interests, fees, etc. - none of that happened.
Subsequent to all of this, our corporate counselors who were engaged in this matter by being uniquely qualified to have a local feel of the lay of the land in South Texas, needed more detailed contractual support which was comparatively much more of Paul's expertise. I witnessed again, what could otherwise be a herd of cats (legal cats that is), be artfully managed and effectively shepherded by Paul in a way that was amenable to everyone. There was no offense taken by any of the parties, no extraneous waste of time and dollars.
Paul wound up expertly completing the task of an effective settlement agreement with the Plaintiffs who were particularly challenging with a series of back and forth(s) which became tedious and at times seemingly counterproductive. In the end, the agreement absolved our companies - and each of us in our capacity as officers.
I believe that Paul's tough but fair minded pragmatic style enabled a settlement with the plaintiff - saving our company, our insurer, and moreover everyone's time which is valuable. Paul is precise and appropriately respects the importance of both accuracy of facts and personal nuances of the parties involved.
Posted by Joseph Soliz
Paul is an excellent lawyer generally - however, he is a elite trial lawyer. I have known him for approximately 10 years and have regularly worked with him in litigation matters - mainly oil & gas, corporate or contract disputes. I have found him to be reliable and knowledgeable and consistently thorough, strategic and effective. From my discussions with other attorneys, I believe that he has an excellent reputation as a trial and appellate lawyer.
Posted by Andy
Mr. Simon assisted me with settling an employment contract dispute with a previous employer of mine in a swift, and professional manner. He was helpful and consistent in every way possible. Mr. Simon displayed an extremely high quality of character and honor during my time working with him. Mr. Simon is, in my opinion, in the upper echelon of attorneys in the country. I will highly recommend his services in the future.
Benjamin Rose, Personal injury Attorney
Relationship: Opposing Counsel on matter
Paul is an ideal litigator. He not only fiercely represents his clients and pursues multiple avenues to secure the best result, he also is a reasonable adversary who puts his clients interests above any personal concern.