Any experienced trial lawyer is known by the judges before whom he or she practices—for better or worse. In the case of Dan Boyd, it is for the better, and you do not have to take our word for it. Here's why:

Boyd has published a number of law review articles and treatises on subjects like jury misconduct, attorney conflicts of interest, and pretrial procedure. When a case is decided on appeal, the appellate court usually writes and has published an "opinion"—which is a description of the case and statement of the reasons for the decision. These "opinions" appear in law books that are in every law library of lawyers, judges, and law schools. The opinions are part of what becomes precedent for deciding future cases.

In these opinions, the courts often bolster their reasoning by "citing" either previous cases, or in some cases, law review articles or treatises that are recognized as being expert and reliable.

Several published opinions of Texas appellate courts, including the Supreme Court of Texas, have cited Boyd's publications as authority for their decisions. For instance, in the case Flores v. Dosher, the Supreme Court of Texas, in an opinion reversing a case due to jury misconduct, stated: "In light of this evidence and on the basis of the record as a whole, we must hold as a matter of law that the misconduct was material and probably resulted in harm to the plaintiffs. See generally: Pope, Jury Misconduct and Harm, 12 Baylor L. Rev. 355...; Boyd, The Current State of Jury Misconduct Claims in Texas Civil Cases, 21 S. Tex. L. J. 23..." 622 S.W.2d 573."

There, the Texas Supreme Court was "citing" as authority for its decision, two law review articles that it considered sufficiently expert and reliable on which to base its decision. One was by Jack Pope, himself at that time one of the members of that court. The other was by Dan Boyd. This and other published opinions citing Boyd as an authority appear in virtually every Texas law library.

Only a small percentage of trial lawyers have been cited as authority in published cases like this. But because Dan Boyd has, and because much of the legal community is aware of that, his credibility and reputation before the courts is extraordinarily enhanced.