OPINION
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Anglo-Dutch Petroleum International v. Greenberg Peden, P.C. (Tex. 2011)
(Opinion by Justice Hecht)
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
FULL TEXT OF OPINION [ coming soon ]
Opinions are available in pdf from the Court's website. Follow docket-number hotlink or the case-style hyperlink
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
OPINION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS BELOW: Court of Appeals
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also see: Texas Causes of Action | 2011 Texas Supreme Court Opinions | 2011 Tex Sup Ct Per Curiams
Anglo-Dutch Petro Int. Inc. v. Greenberg Peden, P.C.,
No. 08-0833 (Tex. Aug. 26, 2011)(Opinion by Justice Nathan Hecht)(contract construction, legal services
agreement not ambiguous and not a jury issue)
ANGLO-DUTCH PETROLEUM INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND ANGLO-DUTCH (TENGE) L.L.C. v. GREENBERG
PEDEN, P.C. AND GERARD J. SWONKE; from Harris County; 14th district (14-07-00343-CV, 267 SW3d 454,
08-26-08)
The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to the trial court.
Justice Hecht delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Jefferson, Justice Johnson, Justice
Willett, and Justice Guzman joined. [pdf]
The parties dispute whether an attorney fee agreement is ambiguous. The client contends
that an agreement on law firm letterhead, signed by a lawyer on behalf of the firm, is with the firm,
not with the lawyer personally. The lawyer counters that his use of personal pronouns in the
agreement, as well as surrounding circumstances, create an ambiguity that must be resolved by a
jury. We agree with the client and therefore reverse the judgment of the court of appeals.
267 S.W.3d 454 (Tex. App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 2008)
In sum, the circumstances in which the Fee Agreement was executed do not suggest that the
parties must have intended something different from what they plainly stated. We hold that the
agreement was between Anglo-Dutch and Greenberg Peden.
Construing client–lawyer agreements from the perspective of a reasonable client in the
circumstances imposes a responsibility of clarity on the lawyer that should preclude a determination
that an agreement is ambiguous in most instances. Lawyers appreciate the importance of words
and “are more able than most clients to detect and repair omissions in client-lawyer contracts.”
A client’s best interests, which its lawyer is obliged to pursue, do not include having a jury construe
their agreements.
The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court
for further proceedings
Justice Wainwright delivered an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part. [pdf]
Justice Lehrmann delivered a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Medina and Justice Green joined. [pdf]
Link to e-briefs including amicus briefs:
ANGLO-DUTCH PETROLEUM INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. GREENBERG PEDEN, P.C.