law-leases | lease law |
LEASE LAW DECISIONS OF THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT
COURTS OF APPEALS CASES (pet. denied)
07-019
SOLAR SOCCER CLUB v. PRINCE OF PEACE LUTHERAN CHURCH OF CARROLLTON, TEXAS; from
Collin County; 5th district (05-06-00130-CV, 234 SW3d 814, 09-19-07, pet. denied Aug. 2008)(lease
dispute, breach, quantum meruit claim)
We overrule Solar's issues regarding (i) res judicata and limitations, (ii) summary judgment on the
insurance clause of the lease, (iii) the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury's findings regarding
breach of the utilities and use clauses of the lease, (iv) termination of the lease, and (v) its counterclaims.
We sustain Solar's issue contending summary judgment should not have been granted for Prince of Peace
on Solar's alleged breach of the field maintenance provision of the lease. We sustain Prince of Peace's
cross-issue regarding the quantum meruit award to Solar. We overrule Prince of Peace's cross-issues
regarding the trial judge's rulings on Solar's supersedeas bonds. We remand the issues of breach of the
field maintenance provision and Prince of Peace's attorney's fees to the trial court for further proceedings.
08-0366
NATIONAL ADVERTISING COMPANY v. LARRY E. POTTER; from Harris County; 1st district
(01-06-01042-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 04-03-08, pet. denied)(billboard lease)
08-0282 THE KITTEN FAMILY LIVING TRUST AND JERRY KITTEN v. SOUTH PLAINS LAMESA
RAILROAD, LTD. AND LARRY DALE WISENER; from Lubbock County; 7th district (07-06-00209-CV, ___
SW3d ___, 01-28-08, pet denied June 2008) (lease agreement and easement agreement, merger
doctrine, merger clause, ambiguity)
07-0923
LANDRY'S SEAFOOD HOUSE-ADDISON, INC., ET AL. v. DARYL N. SNADON; from Dallas County; 5th
district (05-05-01577-CV, 233 SW3d 430, 07-13-07, pet. denied April 2008)(commercial lease)
Daryl N. Snadon sued Landry's Seafood House-Addison, Inc. and Landry's Restaurants, Inc. (Landry's) for
amounts due under a commercial lease and a guarantee agreement. A jury found in Snadon's favor, and
the trial court entered a final judgment on the verdict. Landry's appeals, bringing four issues: (1) Snadon
did not prove he was entitled to recover under the lease; (2) there was legally and factually insufficient
evidence to support the award of damages; (3) the trial court erred in denying Landry's motion for new trial,
or in the alternative, for a remittitur because the damages were excessive; (4) this case should be reversed
and remanded because a portion of the reporter's record is missing due to no fault of Landry's. For the
reasons that follow, we resolve Landry's issues against it and affirm the trial court's final judgment.