Eric Cassidy’s trial, arbitration and appellate practice is concentrated on complex energy and commercial issues. His practice focuses on civil trials, primarily in the energy, construction and securities law fields.

Eric maintains a diverse litigation practice focusing on oil and gas technology, energy related construction and a variety of types of cases, including contract disputes, securities and corporate matters, commercial fraud litigation, trade secret and noncompete enforcement cases, and unfair competition claims. He has first-chair bench trial and jury trial experience and has successfully represented clients in US and international arbitral hearings.

Eric is a member of the Houston and American Bar Associations, and the State Bar of Texas. As part of the Houston Bar Association, he participates in the Oil, Gas & Mineral Law Section, the Construction Law Section and the International Law Section.

Eric is a 2011 graduate of the National Institute for Trial Advocacy’s Trial Skills Program and the Association of General Contractors Advanced Management Program. During his academic career at the University of Texas Law School he was awarded the Order of Barristers, which recognized the top 10 advocates in his class of more than 400 students. He was the winner of the Best Advocate Award at the ABA National Moot Court Competition, Western Region and was a member of the University of Texas’ National Moot Court Team. Eric was also a Rotary Ambassador Scholar at the University of Warwick, England.

Eric actively represents pro bono clients in numerous civil matters through the Houston Volunteer Lawyers Program’s Equal Access to Justice Champions Program. His work resulted in recognition of Squire Sanders by the Houston Bar Association as a pro bono star in 2008.

He is a former fellow in public affairs with the Coro Foundation in St. Louis, Missouri.

Speaking Engagements and Articles

• Speaker, “International Primer for Independents,” Houston Bar Association, Oil, Gas & Mineral Law Section, 2012.
• Speaker, “The Texas Construction Anti-Indemnity Act,” Houston Bar Association, Construction Law Section, 2011.
• Author, “The Three-Legged Stool: A Practical Approach to Negotiating Choice of Law Provisions by Reference to Anti-Injunction Statutes in Texas and Louisiana,” The Energy Law Advisor, Vol. 5 No. 4 (2011).

Representative Experience

• Representing the owner of a biodiesel business in a trade secret and employment agreement dispute in an expedited bench trial on the merits resulting in a verdict and take-nothing judgment for the client.
• Representing the owner of a refinery waste storage facility in a jury trial in construction defect litigation against the general contractor resulting in a verdict for the client on the merits.
• Representing successfully a cross-border joint venture owner of a multimillion-dollar pipeline and terminal facility in international construction defect and delay damage arbitration before the International Chamber of Commerce.
• Representing successfully an energy company against one of the largest public electric power companies in the United States in a jury trial in a breach of contract claim resulting in a US$100 million settlement for the client.
• Representing successfully a national brokerage firm in federal court subprime securities fraud litigation at a bench trial involving allegations of more than US$10 million in losses, resulting in a grant of summary judgment and settlement favorable to the client.
• Representing successfully Johns Hopkins University in a special appearance in a state court appeal contesting jurisdiction, resulting in the appellate court reversing the trial court order and dismissing claims on jurisdictional grounds against the client.
• Representing successfully a brokerage firm in a FINRA arbitration against a claim for US$1.4 million in damages in which claimant's expert was disqualified on cross-examination, resulting in a take-nothing judgment in favor of the client.
• Representing successfully a brokerage firm and an individual in a FINRA arbitration against a financial institution seeking a temporary restraining order, equitable and monetary relief for alleged theft of trade secrets, resulting in the denial of equitable relief and a take-nothing award in favor of the client.