documents, and ultimately, “bullying her” into submission. In support of these contentions, Chavez relies on her own affidavit wherein she testified Mr. Ro-senthal pressured her and her family to settle the case in the summer of 2010 by yelling at her and sending a man to her house with settlement papers. Duress is an affirmative defense to the enforcement of a contract. Tex. R. Civ. P. 94. However, it is a well-established principle that to invalidate an agreement based on duress, the duress must come from the opposing party to the agreement. Lee v. Lee, 44 S.W.3d 151, 154 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, pet. denied) (citing Kosowska v. Khan, 929 S.W.2d 505, 508 (Tex.App.—San Antonio 1996, writ denied)). It may not come from the claimant’s own attorney. Lee, 44 S.W.3d at 154 (<HOLDING>); Kosowska, 929 S.W.2d at 508 (holding that
holding that appellants claim that her former attorney coerced her into signing stipulation awarding exhusband certain property failed because coercion did not come from opposing counsel holding the petitioner abandoned her cat claim when she failed to raise it in her initial appellate brief holding that the former wife did not waive her attorneyclient privilege simply because the credibility of her claim that she relied on her husbands representations could be impeached by deposing her former attorney holding that threatening employee to mind her own business investigating her videotaping her without her permission and forcing her to take polygraph could not be considered adverse employment actions because they had no effect on conditions of employment holding that working conditions were not intolerable to the point of coercion where supervisors yelled at employee told her she was a poor manager gave her poor performance evaluations chastised her in front of customers and once required her to work with an injured back