We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Attempting to reconnect
Hon. April Farris
Justice · Place 3
Fifteenth Court of Appeals
Biography
April Farris was appointed to the Fifteenth Court of Appeals on September 1 of 2024. April previously served on the First Court of Appeals after being appointed in 2021 and elected in 2022. Before joining the Court, April was a partner at Yetter Coleman LLP, where she handled complex appellate litigation for energy, technology, and government clients. While in private practice, she was recognized in appellate law by Law360, Best Lawyers in America, and Thompson Reuters' Super Lawyers. In 2020, she was one of five attorneys in the nation to be named a Law360 appellate Rising Star, an honor reserved for lawyers under 40. April previously served as an Assistant Solicitor General for the State of Texas, handling appeals for various Texas agencies. She is a former councilmember for the Texas State Bar's Appellate Section and a current councilmember for the Civil Rights & Civil Liberties Section. She serves as a trustee for the Texas Supreme Court Historical Association, and she is on the board of the Garland R. Walker Inn of Court in Houston. She is a member of the State Bar of Texas Pattern Jury Charge Oversight Committee, and she is on the editorial board of The Advocate. In 2022 and 2023, she was a guest instructor for Harvard Law School's Introduction to Trial Advocacy Program. April clerked for Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. She graduated from Harvard Law School cum laude in 2009, and she earned her bachelor's degree summa cum laude from Abilene Christian University in 2006.
Opinions by Judge Farris (2)
Dissent Argues Business Court Correctly Applied Rule 91a Standard in Attorney Immunity Case
In a dissent from a mandamus proceeding reviewing Business Court Division 11B's denial of a Rule 91a motion to dismiss, an appellate judge argues that the majority improperly lowered the threshold for dismissal when evaluating attorney immunity as a defense to tortious interference claims. Taking the plaintiff's allegations as true—that Jackson sought to oust Reynolds's CEO to secure the position for himself—the dissent concludes the Business Court properly denied dismissal because the pleadings preclude any finding that Jackson's conduct qualifies for attorney immunity as a matter of law.
Business Court Modification of Temporary Injunction Fails Rule 684 Bond Requirement in Non-Compete Dispute
The Fifteenth Court of Appeals reversed in part a Business Court order modifying a temporary injunction against former ES3 Minerals employees and their competing venture, holding that the injunction bond failed to adequately protect appellants' interests under Rule 684 and that the order lacked adequate specificity regarding enjoined subsidiaries. The court also held that challenges to portions of the injunction imposed by the original district court—but not reviewed or reimposed by the Business Court—were not properly before it on appeal.