John Michael Frick

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.

• Civil Litigation
• Contract Litigation
• Commercial Litigation
• Real Estate Litigation
• Professional Liability

• Zoom
• Microsoft Teams
• WebEx

• 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

Since 1988

5th Circuit

Since 1992

Partner

Reid, Dennis & Frick, PC

2022 - Current

Member

Steptoe & Johnson, PLLC

2021 - 2021

Partner

Bennett, Weston LaJone & Turner, P.C.

2017 - 2021

Senior Attorney

Reid & Dennis, PC

2010 - 2017

Solo Practitioner

Law Offices of John M. Frick

2001 - 2010

Partner

Mills, Presby & Associates, L.L.P.

1995 - 2001

Associate

Godwin & Carlton, P.C.

1989 - 1995

Briefing Attorney

Court of Appeals, Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

1988 - 1989

SMU Dedman School of Law

Doctor of Jurisprudence/Juris Doctor (J.D.)

1988

Southern Methodist University

B.S. (1985) | Political Science

1981 - 1985

Honors: Summa Cum Laude

Southern Methodist University

B.A. (1985) | Psychology

1981 - 1985

Honors: Summa Cum Laude

AV-Preeminent

Martindale-Hubbell

2004

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

1988 - Current

Board-Certified, Civil Trial Law

Texas Board of Legal Specialization

2010

Q. Will a non compete affect my ability to move to another company?

January 2, 2025

A: A non-compete agreement can restrict your ability to move to a different company in Texas. It depends on whether the non-compete agreement itself is legally enforceable under the Covenants Not to Complete Act and whether the work you will be doing for the new company violates the terms of your non-compete agreement.

Q. We bought a mobile home on a 25 year contract, but it is not structurally what they told us it would be. Lawsuit?

January 2, 2025

A: Your rights will depend heavily on your sales contract, warranty, and other written documentation. It would be extremely unusual to be able to enforce a verbal conversation with a sales representative that substantially varies from the contents of those documents.

That being said, most single story dwellings are constructed using studs that are on 16-inc or 24-inch centers. Six-inch centers would be extremely unusual. On the other hand, while homes are often constructed using 2x4 inch studs, the exterior walls of manufactured homes are often constructed using 2x6 inch studs, both because of thermal insulation and to withstand higher winds. Six-inch studs are a selling point for this reason.

Absent some written documentation stating the studs would be on six-inch centers, I would want to make very certain that there was not a misunderstanding between you and your salesperson in which you were thinking six-inch centers and the salesperson was saying six-inch studs. ... Read More

Q. What federal statue would hold up on snap removal to federal court on a breach of lease. Major Federal crimes

January 2, 2025

A: It is very difficult to understand the procedural history in your question. Ordinarily, the plaintiff would initially choose in which forum, state or federal, to file the lawsuit. If the plaintiff has filed in state court, but there are sufficient grounds for federal jurisdiction--either via federal question or diversity--the defendant has the right to remove the state court case to federal court.

Your phrasing "why the defendant has a federal claim in their state court proceeding" does not make sense to me in this context. The defendant is the party being sued--which would be you if you removed the case to federal court. If you properly removed the case based on diversity, then it is not necessary to "quote federal law." Moreover, federal question jurisdiction is premised upon whether the plaintiff is asserting a claim under federal law--not the defendant.

Finally, you talk about an entity you "headed the suit up with." Most business entities cannot appear in either state or federal court (except smalls claims court in certain cases) except through a licensed attorney. Unless you are a licensed attorney, you likely cannot represent the entity in either state or federal court. ... Read More