We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Attempting to reconnect
Hon. Jerry D. Bullard
Judge · Seat 8A
Texas Business Court · Eighth Business Court Division (Fort Worth)
Biography
Judge Jerry Bullard serves on the Texas Business Court’s Eighth Division, which is based in Fort Worth, Texas but covers 18 counties in North Texas. Prior to his appointment, Judge Bullard was a shareholder and attorney with Adams, Lynch & Loftin, P.C. He has over 30 years of experience in state and federal court trial and appellate litigation. During that time, in addition to handling complex commercial litigation matters, Judge Bullard routinely represented and consulted with individuals and business organizations with respect to organizational governance, policy drafting, commercial transactions, and other operational matters. Judge Bullard is board certified in civil appellate law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, is a member and treasurer of the Board of Directors of the American College of Business Court Judges and serves on the Texas Supreme Court Advisory Committee. Judge Bullard is an active member of the State Bar of Texas and its Appellate, Business Law, Judicial, and Litigation Sections, the Texas Bar College, and the Tarrant County Bar Association. He has also served as a gubernatorial appointee on the Texas Juvenile Justice Board, a Section Representative on the State Bar of Texas Board of Directors, a member of the Texas Supreme Court’s Conduct Commission Procedural Rules Task Force, and a member of the State Bar of Texas Court Administration Task Force. Judge Bullard received a Bachelor of Arts from Baylor University and his law degree from The University of Texas at Austin School of Law.
Opinions by Judge Bullard (6)
Specific Jurisdiction Established Over Out-of-State Airline Based on Texas Operations Under Multi-State Alliance Agreement
In American Airlines v. JetBlue Airways, the Business Court of Texas denied JetBlue's special appearance challenge, finding that American had pleaded sufficient facts to establish personal jurisdiction over JetBlue in a dispute arising from the Northeast Alliance's profit-sharing agreement. The court held that JetBlue failed to meet its burden to negate all jurisdictional allegations despite arguing its Texas contacts were minimal.
Business Court Enforces Seven-Day Summary Judgment Evidence Deadline and Parses Expectancy Versus Reliance Damages in Oil and Gas Contract Dispute
In Slant Operating v. Octane Energy Operating, Judge Bullard granted Octane's motion to strike untimely summary judgment evidence filed one day late and granted partial summary judgment on lost revenue claims, holding that the operator plaintiff lacks standing to recover lost production damages but may proceed on redesign costs and expectancy damages. The December 22, 2025 memorandum opinion underscores strict enforcement of Rule 166a deadlines and clarifies which plaintiff entities may recover which categories of contract damages in oil and gas breach-of-contract cases.
Contract Definiteness and Mutual Assent: Business Court Enforces Reciprocal Waiver Agreement in Oil-and-Gas Dispute
In Slant Operating v. Octane Energy Operating, Judge Bullard granted summary judgment on liability for breach of a reciprocal waiver agreement governing off-lease penetration point permits, rejecting indefiniteness and exhaustion-of-remedies defenses. The December 22, 2025 opinion from Division 8 provides critical guidance on enforcing industry-specific agreements where one party performs but the other refuses reciprocal performance.
Amount in Controversy Determined at Filing, Not by Future Legislation: Business Court Remands Oil & Gas Dispute Below $10 Million Threshold
In OWL Assetco1 v. EOG Resources, the Business Court granted remand after EOG removed an oil and gas contract dispute from Harris County district court, with OWL seeking compensatory damages exceeding $1 million for remediating three produced water spills and EOG counterclaiming for approximately $929,192 in liquidated damages. The court's forthcoming written opinion will explain in detail why it concluded the case should be remanded to state district court.
Pleading Jurisdictional Facts Under Section 25A.004(d)(1): Business Court Denies Plea to the Jurisdiction in Oil and Gas Reciprocal Waiver Dispute
In Slant Operating v. Octane Energy Operating, Judge Bullard denied Octane's plea to the jurisdiction, holding that Slant sufficiently pleaded that a reciprocal waiver agreement concerning off-lease drilling permits constituted a qualified transaction under Texas Government Code § 25A.004(d)(1) and that Octane failed to refute the existence of jurisdictional facts. The opinion clarifies the burden-shifting framework when a defendant challenges both pleading sufficiency and the existence of jurisdictional facts in the Business Court.
Rule 91a Dismissal Standards Applied to TTLA and Fraud Claims in LLC Expulsion Dispute
In Tall v. Vanderhoef, the Business Court of Texas denied in part a Rule 91a motion targeting individual TTLA and fraud claims brought by an expelled LLC member, while granting a motion to stay proceedings pending arbitration of the underlying expulsion dispute. The court's forthcoming written opinion will address whether allegations of misappropriated distributions constitute property interests distinct from company assets under the Texas Business Organizations Code.