Represented a pipeline contractor in a Texas state court in the defense of $40 million in claims asserted by a pipeline owner and the assertion of a $14.8 million counterclaim against the pipeline owner arising from the construction of a 31-mile pipeline project in Indiana and Illinois. During the course of this representation, we obtained rulings that: the pipeline owner was guilty of spoliation of its project emails; the pipeline owner was guilty of spoliating the surplus pipe from the project; the pricing terms in the contract were unambiguous and applied regardless of the actual costs incurred by our client, which eliminated the owner’s primary defense to $2.8 million of the claims asserted by our client; excluding evidence of settlement offers made by our client, which the owner intended to use as admissions of liability; denying the owner’s motion for summary judgment on our client’s claim for interest under the Texas Prompt Pay Act; and prohibiting the owner’s damages expert from opining that our client was responsible for the vast majority of the owner’s claims. The pipeline owner and our client subsequently settled the claims between them. The terms of the settlement are confidential.