We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Attempting to reconnect
Hon. Bill Whitehill
Judge · Seat 1B
Texas Business Court · First Business Court Division (Dallas)
Biography
Bill Whitehill is an inaugural Judge of the Texas Business Court First Division, Dallas. He came to the Court from Condon Tobin Sladek Thornton Nerenberg PLLC, where he was a member and led the firm’s Appellate Section. Before joining the Business Court, Bill served as a Justice on the Texas Fifth District Court of Appeals, where he authored over 600 substantive opinions. Bill was an associate and partner at Gardere Wynne Sewell, LLP, now known as Foley & Lardner, LLP for thirty-three years. At Gardere, he handled commercial, antitrust, securities, intellectual property, and fiduciary trials and appeals. He is a sustaining life fellow of the Texas Bar Foundation, and fellow of the Dallas Bar Foundation. He is a homeless kitchen volunteer for Cornerstone Baptist Church and is a former co-teacher and mentor at Cornerstone Crossroads Academy. Bill received a Bachelor of Business Administration in Finance from The University of Texas at Austin and a Juris Doctor with honors from the SMU Dedman School of Law and an Order of the Coif member.
Opinions by Judge Whitehill (10)
Personal Jurisdiction Over Corporate Agents Requires Allegations of Personal Tortious Acts, Not Imputed Corporate Conduct
In CWK Management v. Maggi, the Texas Business Court granted a nonresident shareholder's special appearance, holding that specific personal jurisdiction does not exist where plaintiffs allege only that the defendant "concocted" or "orchestrated" a transaction through an LLC, without alleging personal tortious acts in Texas or seeking to pierce the corporate veil. The court rejected imputation of the LLC's contacts to the individual defendant, emphasizing that conclusory group pleading cannot satisfy the plaintiff's jurisdictional burden.
Fiduciary Shield Doctrine Protects Out-of-State Officer from Personal Jurisdiction in Real Estate Joint Venture Dispute
The Business Court granted a California resident's special appearance and dismissed third-party claims without prejudice, holding that respondents failed to plead or prove sufficient Texas contacts to support personal jurisdiction over the officer who allegedly acted solely in his corporate capacity. The court applied the fiduciary shield doctrine despite allegations of fraud and misrepresentation in connection with a failed joint venture to acquire Princeton, Texas real property.
Personal Jurisdiction Requires More Than Investment in Texas-Based Company: Business Court Grants Special Appearance
In Riverside Strategic Capital Fund I v. CLG Investments, 2025 Tex. Bus. 33, Judge Whitehill granted a special appearance by nineteen out-of-state defendants, holding that plaintiffs failed to establish minimum contacts where defendants invested in a Delaware entity governed by Delaware law and made no purposeful contacts with Texas. The court rejected arguments that knowledge of the company's Texas operations, designation of a Texas-based agent, or participation in prior Texas litigation established specific jurisdiction over passive investors.
Business Court Clarifies Removal Procedure, Internal Affairs Jurisdiction, and Amount-in-Controversy Scope in Real Estate Development Dispute
In Chaudhry v. Stillwater Capital Investments, Division 1 held that defendants need not file separate removal notices to benefit from removal, that fraud-in-the-inducement claims regarding LLC company agreements fall within the court's subject matter jurisdiction over internal affairs and governing documents, and that the amount-in-controversy requirement applies case-wide including counterclaims. The court also rejected non-statutory grounds for declining to exercise subject matter jurisdiction.
Personal Jurisdiction Requires Purposeful Forum Contacts Attributable to the Specific Defendant, Not Group Pleading
In Primexx Energy Opportunity Fund v. Primexx Energy Corporation, the Business Court granted special appearances by Angelo Acconcia and Blackstone Inc., holding that plaintiffs failed to establish that claims arose from Acconcia's purposeful contacts with Texas and that his forum contacts were attributable to a different entity, not Blackstone Inc. The court rejected group pleading and required individualized jurisdictional analysis for each defendant, dismissing claims against both defendants for lack of specific personal jurisdiction.
Business Court Clarifies 'Qualified Transaction' Jurisdictional Test: Assignment of Promissory Notes Meets $10 Million Threshold When Contracted-For Interest Included
In *Atlas IDF v. NexPoint Real Estate Partners*, the Business Court's First Division held that an action to collect on assigned promissory notes arises out of a qualified transaction under Government Code § 25A.001(14) where the assignment itself constitutes the transaction and the notes' aggregate principal plus contracted-for interest exceeds $10 million. Judge Whitehill's opinion establishes that "consideration" includes anticipated interest as part of demand notes' bargain and that the "amount in controversy" calculation includes contracted-for interest, not merely principal.
Characterization of Natural Gas as Personalty Defeats Plea to Jurisdiction Based on New Mexico Real Property
In Targa Northern Delaware LLC v. Franklin Mountain Energy 2 LLC, Division 1 of the Business Court denied a plea to the jurisdiction in a breach-of-contract dispute over natural gas deliveries, holding that the case concerned severed natural gas (personalty) rather than subsurface mineral interests (realty) in New Mexico. The court concluded that any effect on New Mexico real property ownership was merely incidental and collateral to the core issue of which party first materially breached its contractual delivery obligations.
Filing an Answer in One Texas Court Constitutes Consent to Personal Jurisdiction Statewide for the Same Dispute
In Primexx Energy Opportunity Fund, LP v. Primexx Energy Corporation, the Texas Business Court denied special appearances by nine Blackstone-affiliated defendants, holding that filing an answer without a special appearance in an earlier Dallas County suit involving the same dispute constituted consent to personal jurisdiction in Texas for a subsequently filed Business Court action. The ruling establishes that consent to litigate a dispute extends to the state as a whole, not merely to a particular court within the state.
Business Court Lacks Authority Over Pre-September 1, 2024 Cases: Whitehill Grants Remand in Synergy Global
In Synergy Global Outsourcing, LLC v. Hinduja Global Solutions, Inc., the Business Court of Texas granted a motion to remand a 2019-filed contract dispute, holding that H.B. 19, § 8's plain text restricts the court's authority to "civil actions commenced on or after September 1, 2024," precluding removal of cases filed in district court before that date. The October 31, 2024 opinion resolves a threshold statutory construction question about the temporal scope of the court's removal jurisdiction under Government Code § 25A.006.
Business Court Remands Pre-Effective-Date Case Removed After September 1, 2024
In Energy Transfer LP v. Culberson Midstream, Judge Whitehill granted a motion to remand a case that was originally filed in district court before September 1, 2024, but subsequently removed to the Business Court. The decision establishes that the Business Court lacks jurisdiction over cases filed before its statutory effective date, even when removal is attempted after that date.