Skip to content
Phillip B. Dye, Jr.
Phillip B. Dye, Jr.
Senior Partner — International Litigation
Senior Partner — International Litigation

Phillip B. Dye, Jr.

Phillip B. Dye, Jr.

Texas Tower
845 Texas Avenue
Suite 4700
Houston, Texas 77002

start quote symbolA lot of people would describe me as a ‘law lawyer. I really enjoy the tactical aspects of the law. For instance, with the cross-border litigation I’ve been involved in, you often have to look into both countries’ laws, how they differ, how they intersect. I love figuring out the mesh between two different legal systems and how you can use that to help your client. It’s like solving a puzzle.end quote symbol
Phillip B. Dye, Jr.

Experience Highlights

  • (Colo. Dist. – Denver Cnty.) After a three-week trial to the court, secured a $280 million judgment in favor of Antero Treatment while defeating a $118 million counterclaim; the Court found that the defendant fraudulently induced Antero into signing an agreement for the design, construction and operation of a facility for the treatment of produced and flowback water; the Court also found that Antero properly terminated the agreement after the defendant defaulted by failing to construct the facility according to the requirements of the contract

  • (Colo. Dist. – Denver Cnty.) – Secured a jury verdict for $97 million (net) in damages on behalf of Antero Resources; the defendants failed to take delivery of natural gas under long-term sales agreements forcing Antero to sell the gas at a loss; under the contracts, Antero was entitled to cover damages, but the defendants claimed force majeure; in addition, the defendants filed a counter-claim seeking $37 million in damages; following a two week trial, the jury awarded Antero $97 million (net) in damages, rejected the force majeure defense and rejected the defendants counter-claims

  • (Colo. Dist. – Denver Cnty. and Arbitration) — Secured an arbitration award on behalf of an energy company, which was affirmed by a state district court in Denver, Colorado; claimants were purchasers of natural gas that sought to retrade NAESB gas purchase agreements with the energy company; after a final hearing, the arbitration panel rejected the claimants’ attempt to substitute an alternate index price into the long term contracts 

  • (D. Colo.) — Represented an energy company in a dispute regarding whether a Market Disruption Event had occurred under the terms of their long term NAESB contracts for natural gas, impacting price to be paid; the jury unanimously found that the plaintiff breached the contracts and awarded a $60 million (net) verdict in favor of the client

  • (S.D. Tex.) — Obtained dismissal of $33 million tort claim on forum non conveniens grounds; successfully argued for denial of motion to join additional, diversity destroying defendants

  • Defeated two separate attempts to enjoin our client, Gastar Exploration, from hydraulically fracturing wells in the Marcellus Shale in West Virginia; the Plaintiff, the owner of a solution mining plant located on property adjoining the wells, first sought an injunction in the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; the Pennsylvania court denied the requested injunction after presiding over a two week hearing and receiving testimony from eight different expert witnesses; Within days of the ruling, the Plaintiff filed a second suit seeking an injunction in Marshall County, West Virginia; after reviewing the record from Pennsylvania and submissions of the parties, the West Virginia court dismissed the Plaintiff’s second suit on collateral estoppel and res judicata grounds

  • (S.D. Tex.) — Obtained dismissal of our client, Plains Marketing L.P., from several suits brought by Pemex Exploracion y Produccion (“Pemex”) seeking to recover $300 million in damages related to gas condensate allegedly stolen from gas fields in Northern Mexico and smuggled into Texas; the district court issued a series of rulings which ultimately resulted in a complete dismissal of all claims against Plains Marketing

  • (S.D. Tex.) — Obtained an order on behalf of a Middle Eastern state authorizing proceedings in federal court in Houston against a subsidiary province pursuant to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA)

  • (5th Cir.); (W.D. Tex.) — Obtained mandamus relief representing a tire manufacturer in Multi-District Litigation (MDL); the MDL court, located in Indiana, denied motions to dismiss for forum non conveniens and remanded six cases to the federal court in Austin for trial; when the trial court in Texas refused to reconsider the MDL court’s forum non conveniens ruling, mandamus relief was sought and granted; the appellate court’s opinion was significant with respect to forum non conveniens issues and the treatment by one circuit of the cases that are transferred from an MDL court located in a different circuit

  • Obtained a finding of bad faith by plaintiffs in connection with proceedings in Mexico; the plaintiffs had been dismissed based on forum non conveniens; the plaintiffs then filed ex parte proceedings in Mexico and obtained an order from a Mexican court that it did not have jurisdiction over a suit brought by Mexican citizens concerning events in Mexico; the plaintiffs attempted to use this order to reopen their case in the United States; the MDL court overseeing the case permitted an investigation and, based on the evidence discovered by the defendants, found that the Mexican orders were obtained by fraud; the court dismissed the case and sanctioned the plaintiffs’ Mexican law expert

  • (S.D. Tex.) – Successfully quashed writs of garnishment obtained by a judgment creditor of the Islamic Republic of Iran; the writs had been obtained in an attempt to garnish $1 billion allegedly owed to Iran by our client, an international oil company; the district court granted the motions to quash the writs of garnishment pursuant to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act

  • (Tex. Dist. – Harris Cnty., El Paso Cnty.) – Obtained dismissals of a manufacturer of metal halide bulbs from two separate lawsuits filed in connection with a massive fire in Mexico; suits were filed in Texas state courts seeking recovery of tens of millions of dollars for the destruction of an extensive maquiladora facility.  Both cases were dismissed on the basis of forum non conveniens

  • (NY. Sup.) – Successfully won dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction in a $186 million securities fraud claim brought in Texas state court against the Argentine subsidiary of an international oil company; the plaintiff later re-filed the case in New York state court and that case was also dismissed by the New York court on jurisdictional grounds

  • Successfully defended proceedings arising from an oil well blowout in Syria; represented multiple clients in the case, dismissal was obtained for one client based on the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act; the remainder of the clients were dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction

  • Grynberg v. BP, P.L.C., 527 Fed.Appx. 278, (5th Cir. 2013)

  • Bailey v. Shell Western E&P, Inc., 609 F.3d 710, (5th Cir. 2010)

  • In re Ford Motor Co., 591 F.3d 406, (5th Cir. 2009)

  • Ptasynski v. Kinder Morgan G.P., Inc., 220 Fed.Appx. 876, (10th Cir. 2007)

  • Petrobras America Inc. v. Union Oil Co. of Cal., 177 Fed.Appx. 460, (5th Cir. 2006)

  • Pickens v. Shell Technology Ventures Inc., (5th Cir. 2004)

  • Hughes v. Tobacco Institute, Inc., 278 F.3d 417, (5th Cir. 2001)

  • Green v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 274 F.3d 263, (5th Cir. 2001)

  • Perenco Nigeria Ltd. v. Ashland Inc., 242 F.3d 299, (5th Cir. 2001)

  • State of Rio de Janeiro of Federated Republic of Brazil v. Philip Morris Inc., 239 F.3d 714, (5th Cir. 2001)

  • Kelly v. Syria Shell Petroleum Development B.V., 213 F.3d 841, (5th Cir. 2000)

  • Grynberg v. Total Compagnie Francaise Des Petroles, 891 F.Supp.2d 663, (D.Del. 2012)

  • Grynberg v. BP P.L.C., 855 F.Supp.2d 625, (S.D. Tx. 2012)

  • Bailey v. Shell Western E & P, Inc., 555 F.Supp.2d 767, (S.D. Tex. 2008)

  • Darby Trading Inc. v. Shell Intern. Trading and Shipping Co. Ltd., 568 F.Supp.2d 329, (S.D.N.Y. 2008)

  • In re Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. Tires Products Liability Litigation, 470 F.Supp.2d 931, (S.D. Ind. 2006)

  • In re Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. Tires Products Liability Litigation, 470 F.Supp.2d 917, (S.D. Ind. 2001)

  • In re Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. Tires Products Liability Litigation, 470 F.Supp.2d 930, (S.D. Ind. 2006)

  • Grynberg v. Shell Exploration B.V., 433 F.Supp.2d 1229, (D.Colo. 2006)

  • Doe v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Galveston-Houston, 408 F.Supp.2d 272, (S.D. Tex. 2005)

  • Urena Taylor v. Daimler Chrysler Corp., 196 F.Supp.2d 428, 2001, (E.D. Tex. 2001)

  • Owens v. Superfos A/S, 170 F.Supp.2d 1188,  (M.D. Ala. 2001)

  • Hanby v. Shell Oil Co., 144 F.Supp.2d 673, (E.D. Tex. 2001)

  • Burleson v. Liggett Group Inc., 111 F.Supp.2d 825, (E.D. Tex. 2000)

  • Ebrahim v. Shell Oil Co., 847 F.Supp. 65, (S.D. Tex. 1994)

  • In re Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC, 387 S.W.3d 840, (Tex.App.-Beaumont, 2012)

  • Twister B.V. v. Newton Research Partners, LP, 364 S.W.3d 428, (Tex.App.-Dallas, 2012)

  • Ford Motor Co. v. Villanueva, 302 S.W.3d 476, (Tex.App.-Eastland, 2009)

  • New Texas Auto Auction Services, L.P. v. Gomez De Hernandez, 249 S.W.3d 400, (Tex. 2008)

  • Gomez de Hernandez v. Bridgestone/Firestone North American Tire, L.L.C., 204 S.W.3d 473, (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi, 2006)

  • State of Rio De Janeiro of Federative Republic of Brazil v. Philip Morris Inc., 143 S.W.3d 497, (Tex.App.-Beaumont, 2004)

  • Mobil Oil Corp. v. Shores, 128 S.W.3d 718, (Tex.App.-Fort Worth, 2004)

  • Shell Cortez Pipeline Co. v. Shores, 127 S.W.3d 286, (Tex.App.-Fort Worth, 2004)

  • Shell Compania Argentina de Petroleo, S.A. v. Reef Exploration, Inc., 84 S.W.3d 830, (Tex.App.-Hous. [1 Dist.], 2002)

  • In re SWEPI, L.P., 85 S.W.3d 800, (Tex. 2002)

  • Amerada Hess Corp. v. Wood Group Production Technology, 30 S.W.3d 5, (Tex.App.-Hous. [14 Dist.], 2000)


  • Louisiana State University Law Center, J.D. with honors, 1986 (Order of Coif; Phi Kappa Phi; Managing Editor, Louisiana Law Review)
  • Louisiana State University, B.S., 1982
  • Judicial Clerk to The Honorable Fred A. Blanche, Jr., Louisiana Supreme Court, 1985–1986
  • Chambers USA, Litigation: Energy & Natural Resources (Texas), 2005–2020
  • Chambers USA, Litigation: General Commercial (Houston), 2021–2023
  • Legal 500 U.S., Energy: Litigation, 2014, 2015, and 2019; Litigation: General Commercial Disputes, 2016 and 2018; Energy Litigation: Oil & Gas, 2023
  • The Best Lawyers in America© (BL Rankings, LLC), (Houston): International Arbitration, 2006, 2008, 2010–2012, 2014–2021; International Trade and Finance Law, 2005–2006, 2008, 2010–2012, 2014–2021; Commercial Litigation, 2010–2012, 2014–2024; Admiralty and Maritime Law, 2022–2024
  • “Partner to Know,” Global Arbitration Review’s GAR 100, 2010
  • Euromoney’s Benchmark Litigation, “Local Litigation Star”, in Texas, 2017 and 2018
  • Selected to the Texas Super Lawyers list, Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters), 2003–2023
  • Selected to the Who’s Who in Energy list, Houston Business Journal, 2015
  • Member, International Bar Association; American Bar Association; Texas Bar Foundation; Maritime Law Association; Association of International Petroleum Negotiators; International Association of Defense Counsel; Defense Research Institute
  • Vice-Chair, Committee on Admiralty and Maritime Law, Tort and Insurance Practice, American Bar Association
  • Louisiana
  • Texas
  • United States Supreme Court
  • U.S. Courts for the Southern, Eastern, and Western Districts of Texas and the Eastern, Middle, and Western Districts of Louisiana
  • District of Colorado
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Claims
  • “So Your Client Wants to Seize a Vessel (or its Cargo): A Primer on How it’s Done,” 28th Annual David W. Robertson Admiralty and Maritime Law Conference, September 20, 2019 (panelist)
  • “New Unclaimed Property Regulations Now in Effect – What Does This Mean for Property Holders?” V&E Commercial & Business Litigation Update E-communication, October 18, 2017 (co-author)
  • “International Litigation,” The Year in Review (An Annual Publication of The Aba/Section of International Law), Spring 2016 (co-author)
  • “U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies General Jurisdiction Over Non-Resident Corporations,” V&E Litigation Updates E-communication, June 28, 2011
  • “Fighting Forum Shopping in the 21st Century,” International Litigation Quarterly, Summer 2008 (co-author)
  • “International Litigation: Service of Process Abroad,” The International Lawyer, vol. 40, no. 2, Summer 2006 (co-author with Jennifer Davidow and Holly Rumbaugh)
  • Published in both Louisiana Law Review and Law Review