Dallas Nabs Defense Lawyer Discount to Fight Paxton Gun Suits

An acclaimed Texas trial lawyer with a long record of supporting Democratic candidates is charging half his hourly rate to help Dallas thwart Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton‘s (R) push for guns in more public spaces.

High stakes litigator Jeff Tillotson represents the city in a trio of firearms lawsuits from Paxton’s office over whether the lessor of government property for a private event can deny access to patrons legally carrying a gun. Dallas, thus far, is getting favorable rulings in all three suits.

In an interview with Bloomberg Law, Tillotson said he bills a typical client at an hourly rate of about $2,000. According to a contract reviewed by Bloomberg Law obtained through public records, he’s charging the city just $895 per hour in one of the cases.

“They have many, many fine lawyers in the city’s office so the fact they’d give me the opportunity to work on this is an honor,” Tillotson said.

Dallas declined to release invoice statements from his firm, Tillotson Patton, showing how much it’s spending in legal fees to defend the gun restrictions. The city is on the hook directly for one case and for the other two could recoup expenses from private organizations whose firearms bans drew the suits.

The final resolutions will be felt not only in Dallas but throughout the deeply-red state where the legislature has passed some of the most firearms-friendly laws in the country.

People in Texas can carry a handgun openly in libraries, recreation centers, the Texas State Capitol, and government buildings except for when a meeting is happening. Paxton, a right-wing champion of firearms protections, argues Dallas must also allow them in public spaces that are leased by a private entity, because the city can’t confer authority to a third party to ban them that itself lacks.

A prolific Democratic donor, Tillotson in September gave $3,500 to state Rep. James Talarico, the Democrat who won the party’s nomination for US Senate and who will square off against Paxton in November.

Tillotson, 64, said he took the cases not because of political differences with Paxton but because he supports limits on guns in public places for safety reasons.

“It could be Ken Paxton, it could be Ken from Barbie,” Tillotson said. “This is about the city’s rights and obligations, and I think we’re 100% right on it.”

Texas State Fair

The question of whether private parties can ban guns at events held on public property has come up most prominently in a case involving the State Fair of Texas. A decision is pending from the statewide appeals court.

The fair is a nearly month-long annual event held on 277 acres the city leases to a private nonprofit that wants to exclude firearms. Last summer, a trial court dismissed Paxton’s suit, allowing the jamboree to enforce the ban.

The case is likely to wind up at the Texas Supreme Court, which seems eager to discuss gun restrictions generally and the fair ban specifically.

Two years ago, the justices said they lacked sufficient information to resolve Paxton’s challenge to the ban. But, Justice Jimmy Blacklock wrote, “It is a question on which both law-abiding handgun owners and the operators of the State Fair deserve a clear answer.”

More recently, Justice James Sullivan discussed gun restrictions in a case unrelated to Paxton’s fight against Dallas. In a May 15 concurring opinion on the gun ownership rights of persons subject to an order of protection, Sullivan noted it’s been about a century since the court explained what protections state and federal law give to those wishing to keep and bear arms. Texans, he wrote, “shouldn’t have to endure another hundred years of silence from this court.”

Paxton’s two other lawsuits involving private gun bans at Dallas performing arts venues are clinging to life after Tillotson swatted back the state’s bids for pretrial wins this spring. Both remain pending at the trial court.

Paxton, the three-term AG, didn’t respond to a request for comment about the litigation.

Often he’s the one with hired outside help in complex matters, shelling out up to $3,780 an hour to private lawyers if they secure monetary settlements for the state. Yet, in these cases, the AG’s office is facing Tillotson with its own lawyers. Private plaintiffs who joined Paxton in the State Fair lawsuit have separate counsel, Tony McDonald, who accused the city and the fair of a “shell game, trying to distract and hide each other’s responsibility for their violation of Texans’ right to carry.”

Tillotson, A Texas Native

A Texas native who attended high school in Dallas, Tillotson is connected to big cases and clients throughout his four decades practicing law.

He sued cyclist Lance Armstrong to claw back millions in performance bonuses on behalf of a promotion company after the Tour de France winner was caught doping. He won a defamation case for George Michael against a Beverly Hills police officer who said the singer mocked him in the 1998 hit “Outside.” He brought antitrust claims against Google as counsel for Match Group. He represents Fermi co-founder Toby Neugebauer in an ongoing governance fight over its massive artificial intelligence data center in the Texas Panhandle.

Shortly after Paxton filed the first of the gun lawsuits, Tillotson’s firm secured more work from Dallas in a matter concerning a $3 billion shortfall in the city’s police and firefighter’s pension fund. The case settled late last year, and the firm rang up a total bill of $568,000, records show. Tillotson billed the city $950 an hour.

Dallas’ legal department declined to comment about the cases or its use of Tillotson as counsel.

“He’s a very authentic, believable guy in the courtroom,” said James Harris, a Holland & Knight lawyer who represents the State Fair in the Paxton suit and who encouraged the city to hire Tillotson.

Added Harris: “Jeff likes to try cases. He does it all over the country and he’s very good at it.”

The cases are Texas v. Tolbert, Tex. App., 15th Dist., No. 15-25-00122-cv, Texas v. Dallas, Tex. Dist. Ct., No. D-1-GN-25-002553 and Texas v. Dallas, Tex. Dist. Ct., No. D-1-GN-25-002594.