David Bissinger

David Bissinger

Attorney Profile

Top Rated Business Litigation Attorney in Houston, TX

Bissinger, Oshman & Williams LLP
 | 2229 San Felipe St, Suite 1500
Houston, TX 77019
Phone: 713-524-8811
Fax: 713-524-4102
Selected To Super Lawyers: 2009 - 2020
Selected To Rising Stars: 2007
Licensed Since: 1994
Practice Areas:
  • Business Litigation (60%),
  • Energy & Natural Resources (20%),
  • Securities Litigation (10%),
  • Intellectual Property Litigation (10%)
    Attorney Profile
    From the beginning of every case, I prepare for trial. In my experience, that preparation gives clients the most reliable way to evaluate and resolve cases as quickly and as cheaply as circumstances permit. Part of that approach comes from my substantial contingent-fee docket. Trying these cases has given me valuable lessons about what tasks matter and which tasks don't. That experience, combined with my experience trying a variety of types of defendant and plaintiff cases in a variety of tribunals, has proven to be the best way for me to maximize the value of the work I do for clients.

    About David Bissinger

    Admitted: 1994, Texas

    Professional Webpage: http://bowllp.com/attorney/david-bissinger/

    Bar/Professional Activity:

    • Fellow, Texas Bar Foundation, 2019
    • Fellow, Houston Bar Foundation, 2019
    • Chairman, Houston Bar Association Securities Litigation and Arbitration Section, 2005

    Scholarly Lectures/Writings:

    • Co-Author, Arbitration, Bench Trial, or Jury Trial? A Functional Guide for In-House Counsel, The Texas State Bar Litigation Report (The Advocate), Litigation, 2011
    • Explaining rules of engagement for closing argument and remedies of mistrial, new trial, and contempt., Speaker, Proper and Improper Argument, HBA Litigation Section, Trial Lawyers; Legal, 2016
    • Describes how to prepare for trial by using time manangement techniques ranging from using a kitchen timer to editing your opening statements like George Lucas edited Star Wars., Author, Want to Improve Your Trial Skills? Be Cognizant of the Clock, Texas Lawyer, Trial Law; Arbitrations, 2018
    • In the age of the vanishing jury trial, “litigators” spend a small fraction of the time in the courtroom that their predecessors did in decades past. With so few jury trials, lawyers have become tone deaf to the nuances of bias that pervades trial practice. Lawyers will enjoy more success in their practice by acknowledging, rather than ignoring, the natural biases of the participants and developing a practical understanding of bias in their practices., Author, How to Identify Bias in the Courtroom, National Law Journal, 2018


    • Favorable verdict for defendant accused of theft. In a highly contested and complex case involving allegations of breach of fiduciary duty, theft, and fraud, we defended a financial executive whose former employer threatened him not only with a claim that would have wiped out his personal fortune, but also with criminal prosecution. The employer alleged theft of cash, leading to an error-ridden forensic audit. Our probing discovery led to evidence that other senior managers participated in a variety of overrides of the company’s internal controls. After a trial spanning a month, the jury verdict awarded our client more money than it awarded to his former employer. And although the jury found breach of fiduciary duty and theft occurred, the jury declined to find fraud. The jury also declined to find “clear and convincing” evidence of our client’s breach of fiduciary duty and theft. Moreover, the jury’s verdict included an award of punitive damages in favor of our client – not the plaintiff employer – based on the jury’s finding that the employer had violated the Texas wiretapping statute during its poorly executed forensic audit. The jury also awarded our client actual damages based on his counterclaims for the employer’s refusal to pay our client on his deferred compensation and monies our client had loaned his employer.Although the court disregarded some of the jury’s findings, the jury sent a clear message that the employer had overreached. The jury’s verdict and court’s final judgment kept our client from any criminal prosecution, as well as the catastrophic damages (both actual and punitive) the company sought. The case ultimately settled confidentially., 2014
    • Prosecution of large-scale trade-secrets and fiduciary duty case. Represented major international engineering company in prosecution of trade-secrets and fiduciary-duty claims against former senior executive and that employee’s new employer. Our client’s former executive acquired numerous trade secrets and corporate confidences and disclosed them to new employer as he negotiated favorable compensation package with new employer. After obtaining temporary restraining order, temporary injunction, fast-track trial setting, six months of discovery, and favorable rulings denying defendants’ motions for summary judgment, case settled confidentially the weekend before jury selection. Case involved numerous complex transactions and acts of theft, including international contract bids, massive digital downloads, and highly sensitive strategic corporate transactions., 2019
    • Jury verdict in commercial real-estate case. After a week-long jury trial, obtained for plaintiff tenant a jury verdict of $1,000,000 – the full amount requested – for damages against defendant landlord. Jury found that landlord breached promises in lease, including promises not to unreasonably withhold consent to tenant’s proposed assignment to comparable commercial tenant. Award represented 100% of damages requested., 2018
    • Arbitration award for patent-infringement law firm. Recovered substantially all relief sought for law firm cheated out of contingent fee from settlement of patent-infringement litigation. The law firm had successfully tried to verdict and through appeal a major case for the patent holder, but the patent holder had filed a separate case against the same defendant that had sat dormant because, as we proved in the arbitration, the separate case had no merit. The patent holder negotiated a settlement with the defendant that allocated the vast majority of the proceeds to the groundless separate case. This allocation favored the patent holder because it minimized the fee otherwise payable to our law-firm client. The arbitrator agreed with our law-firm client that the separate case had little to no value. The arbitrator's award of more than $2.6 million included recovery of vast majority of our client's attorneys’ fees, noting that “Mr. Bissinger did an excellent job for his client (as did all counsel herein) in a complex matter involving valuation of patent infringement claims and several legal theories.”, 2016


    • Counseling of private-equity principal in separation from firm., 2019
    • Counseling of senior executive into role as CEO., 2020

    Representative Clients:

    • Contanda Terminals LLC (Houston); East West Bank (Pasadena, California); Exterran (Houston); Keane Group (Houston); Sauve, S.A. (Buenos Aires, Argentina); Midway Companies (Houston); Nexus Energy Systems (Anaheim, California); Process Instruments & Controls (Bakersfield, California); TechnipFMC (Houston); Anejo Uptown Park, LLC (Houston); Arrington Oil & Gas (Midland)., 2019


    Educational Background:

    • B.A., University of Iowa (Phi Beta Kappa; Collegiate Scholar; grant recipient, National Endowment of the Humanities Younger Scholar Award), 1990

    Industry Groups

    • Banking
    • Energy
    • Finance
    • Real Estate
    • Real Estate
    • Securities
    • Technology
    Show More
    Office Location for David Bissinger

    2229 San Felipe St
    Suite 1500
    Houston, TX 77019

    David Bissinger:

    Last Updated: 8/3/2020

    Page Generated: 0.44209289550781 sec