John Michael Frick
Experienced North Texas Civil Trial and Appellate Attorney
John has been representing businesses and business people in the North Texas area for more than thirty years. He has tried numerous cases at various levels of the judicial system, including federal district court and state district court. He has presented appeals to the Supreme Court of Texas, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and ten of the fourteen intermediate courts of appeal in Texas. He has arbitrated cases before the American Arbitration Association and JAMS, Inc. In addition to his trial practice, John is a trained mediator and summary jury trial judge. As a result of displaying a high degree of skill, competence, and professionalism, he has earned an AV-Preeminent rating from Martindale-Hubbell.
John received his law degree from SMU School of Law in 1988, where he served as an Associate Editor for the Southwestern Law Journal. While still in law school, he successfully presented an appeal to the Supreme Court of Texas through the school’s civil clinic program, resulting in a published opinion reversing the lower court. He also completed his first jury trial through the school’s clinic program.
After graduating from law school, John served a judicial clerkship as briefing attorney for the Honorable Gordon H. Rowe, Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. There, John had the pleasure of working with future Supreme Court of Texas Justices Nathan Hecht, Craig Enoch, and James Baker.
As a seasoned trial lawyer, John continues to maintain a high level of practice. He has represented clients in cases reported in the Wall Street Journal and Dallas Morning News, as well as ones featured on local news broadcasts and the national news program, Nightline. His civil trial practice includes representation in both state and federal court and encompasses a wide range of areas.
- Business Law
- Business Contracts, Business Formation, Business Litigation, Mergers & Acquisitions, Partnership & Shareholder Disputes
- Appeals & Appellate
- Civil Appeals, Federal Appeals
- Construction Law
- Construction Contracts, Construction Defects, Construction Liens, Construction Litigation
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Business - Arbitration/Mediation, Family - Arbitration/Mediation
- Personal Injury
- Construction Accidents, Premises Liability, Wrongful Death
- Divorce
- Contested Divorce, Property Division
- Insurance Claims
- Bad Faith Insurance, Business Insurance, Property Insurance
- Civil Litigation
- Contract Litigation
- Commercial Litigation
- Real Estate Litigation
- Professional Liability
-
Credit Cards Accepted
Visa & Mastercard Only -
Rates, Retainers and Additional Information
Provides 90-minute initial consultation for a flat fee of $500. Does not typically work on a contingency fee. Usually requires a retainer.
- Texas
- State Bar of Texas
- ID Number: 07455200
-
- 5th Circuit
-
- English
- Partner
- Reid, Dennis & Frick, PC
- - Current
- Member
- Steptoe & Johnson, PLLC
- -
- Partner
- Bennett, Weston LaJone & Turner, P.C.
- -
- Senior Attorney
- Reid & Dennis, PC
- -
- Solo Practitioner
- Law Offices of John M. Frick
- -
- Partner
- Mills, Presby & Associates, L.L.P.
- -
- Associate
- Godwin & Carlton, P.C.
- -
- Briefing Attorney
- Court of Appeals, Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
- -
- SMU Dedman School of Law
- Doctor of Jurisprudence/Juris Doctor (J.D.)
-
- Southern Methodist University
- B.S. (1985) | Political Science
- -
- Honors: Summa Cum Laude
-
- Southern Methodist University
- B.A. (1985) | Psychology
- -
- Honors: Summa Cum Laude
-
- AV-Preeminent
- Martindale-Hubbell
- For over 100 years, the Bar Register has been a unique guide to the legal community's most eminent professionals. It includes only those select law practices that have earned the highest rating in the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory and have been designated by their colleagues as preeminent in their field. The 2022 Bar Register contains over 14,000 member listings out of more than 1.3 million attorneys in the United States.
- Texas State Bar # 07455200
- Member
- - Current
-
- Board-Certified, Civil Trial Law
- Texas Board of Legal Specialization
- Website
- Reid, Dennis & Frick, PC
- Q. Trying to see if I can sue for male practice
- A: The first thing you must do is take all of your relevant medical records to another surgeon in the same medical specialty and who is licensed in Texas to determine if the first surgeon who did your surgery did or failed to do something in breach of the standard of care that is the proximate cause of the problem that your finger won't make a fist now.
If the surgeon who did your surgery breached the standard of care, you likely can successfully sue for malpractice assuming there aren't other impediments to such a suit like the statute of limitations, etc.
Arthritis and trigger finger are both common reasons a person cannot make a fist. Arthritis and trigger finger are known possible ... Read More
- Q. My son was searched my a manager at an olive garden apon entering for some dinner is that legal
- A: There are really two possibilities:
1. Your son did not consent and the manager assaulted your son.
2. Your son consented and allowed the manager to search him.
A restaurant manager has no effective way of searching a guest without the guest's consent other than by assaulting him. The search itself is meaningless. I can ask to search you. You can say "no" and I have no effective way of legally compelling you to allow me to search you.
The assault, however, can give rise to a lawsuit for the resulting bodily injuries, allowing your son to recover any compensable damages he sustained for medical expenses, lost wages, physical pain and suffering, etc.
- Q. I’m appealing the district court denying my in forma pauperis request saying it’s taking in bad faith
- A: Yes, a district court may dismiss an action when an inmate requests to proceed in forma pauperis if the Court finds that the claim is frivolous or malicious.
Section 14.003(b) provides:
In determining whether a claim is frivolous or malicious, the court may consider whether:
1) the claim's realistic chance of ultimate success is slight;
2) the claim has no arguable basis in law or in fact;
3) it is clear that the party cannot prove facts in support of the claim: or
4) the claim is substantially similar to a previous claim filed by the inmate because the claim arises from the same operative facts.
