Real Trial Lawyers for Real Problems


Warning: Use of undefined constant post_types - assumed 'post_types' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/customer/www/hop-law.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/hoplaw/sidebar-right.php on line 45

Breach of Contract

Response Brief of Appellees

Employers Reinsurance Corporation v. Gordon

This case involved the breach of a high-low settlement agreement entered into during the trial of a medical malpractice case. Heygood, Orr & Pearson represented the plaintiffs in the medical malpractice case. Following a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs, the defendant’s insurance carrier refused to pay the amount due under the high-low settlement agreement. Heygood, Orr & Pearson sued the defendant’s insurance carrier on behalf of the plaintiffs for breach of the agreement. Both parties sought summary judgment. The trial court granted summary judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant appealed. This brief was the appellate brief filed by Heygood, Orr & Pearson on behalf of plaintiffs.

Petitioner’s Brief

Latch v. Gratty, Inc.

This case was a breach of contract case involving the proposed purchase of a Kawasaki dealership min East Texas. Latch had originally signed an agreement to sell his dealership to Gratty if Gratty secured approval from Kawasaki. After Gratty dragged his feet in securing Kawasaki’s approval and Latch was threatened with the potential loss of his franchise, Latch signed a sales agreement with another buyer. Kawasaki eventually terminated Latch’s franchise agreement and refused to award a new franchise to Gratty. Gratty then sued Latch for breach of contract and tortious interference. Gratty prevailed at trial on his tortious interference claim and Latch appealed. The court of appeals affirmed. Latch than filed a petition with the Texas Supreme Court which reversed and rendered a judgment in his favor. This brief was filed by Heygood, Orr & Pearson on behalf of their client.

Appellant’s Brief

City of Brownsville v. AEP Texas Central Company

Description: This case is a breach of contract case involving a contract to purchase an ownership interest in an electric power plant. The defendant sought summary judgment on the basis that a release agreement between the parties released all claims brought by Brownsville. After hundreds of pages of briefing and multiple hearings over an 18-month period, the trial court granted defendant’s motion. Brownsville appealed, arguing that summary judgment was improper because its narrow interpretation of the release agreement as not releasing claims for breach of the parties’ purchase and sale agreement was reasonable. The court of appeals agreed, reversing the trial court and finding that Brownsville’s interpretation of the release agreement was correct. This brief was filed by Heygood, Orr & Pearson on behalf of their client.

Defendant’s Brief in Support of Their Motion for Summary Judgment

In re Brentwood-Lexford Partners, LLC

This case was a breach of contract and conversion case brought by a bankruptcy trustee against the former owners of a real estate property management company. The dispute arose after Brentwood-Lexford defaulted on a note owed to the company from whom it had purchased the stock of another property management company. Plaintiff sued defendants for breach of contract, fraudulent transfer, tortious interference, conspiracy and breach of fiduciary duty after they terminated certain property management contracts, opened up a new property management company and began servicing the former clients of Brentwood-Lexford. This brief was filed by Heygood, Orr & Pearson on behalf of their client.

Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

Boulle v. Boulle

This case was a breach of contract case arising out of the discovery of the world’s largest nickel deposit by Defendant Jeann Boule. Defendant moved for partial summary judgment on the plaintiff’s claims relating to certain geological data to which the plaintiff claimed he was entitled pursuant to an agreement to share profits from certain designated exploration projects. The court granted the motion. The remainder of the case was tried to a defense verdict after a two-week jury trial. This brief was filed by Heygood, Orr & Pearson on behalf of their client.

Defendant’s No-Evidence Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

Boulle v. Boulle

This case was a breach of contract case arising out of the discovery of the world’s largest nickel deposit by Defendant Jeann Boule. Defendant moved for partial summary judgment on the plaintiff’s fraud claim arising from his brother’s alleged breach of an agreement to share profits from certain designated exploration projects. The motion claimed that there was no evidence that the defendant entered into the agreement with no intention of performing. The court granted the motion, eliminating the plaintiff’s fraud claim and removing the possibility of punitive damages. The remainder of the case was tried to a defense verdict after a two-week jury trial. This brief was filed by Heygood, Orr & Pearson on behalf of their client.

Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Traditional and No-Evidence Motion for Summary Judgment

Utter v. North American Bancshares, Inc.

This pleading was a response to a motion for summary judgment filed by the defendants in a breach of contract case brought on behalf of a former bank executive by his widow. The suit alleged that the bank had orally promised the executive a 5% equity interest in the bank payable upon his death or the sale of the bank. The 123-page response addresses issues including the enforceability of oral agreements, the statute of frauds, promissory estoppels, partial performance, the parol evidence rule, statutes of limitations, the doctrine of ratification, the rule against perpetuities, failure of a condition precedent and the economic loss rule. The court denied the defendants’ motion and the case later settled during trial. This brief was filed by Heygood, Orr & Pearson on behalf of their client.

Defendants’ Traditional and No-Evidence Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

Boisseau v. 7-Eleven, Inc.

This motion sought summary judgment in a breach of contract case brought against 7-Eleven by a manufacturer’s representative. The plaintiff alleged that 7-Eleven tortiously interfered with a redemption agreement between the plaintiff and third parties by obtaining confidential documents from parties to the agreement. The motion argued that 7-Eleven’s alleged act of interference did not cause the plaintiff actual damages and that her alleged damages actually flowed from the alleged breach of an entirely separate agreement. The court granted the motion and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims. This brief was filed by Heygood, Orr & Pearson on behalf of their client.

Defendants’ No-Evidence Motion for Summary Judgment

Boisseau v. 7-Eleven, Inc..

This motion sought a no-evidence summary judgment in a breach of contract case brought against 7-Eleven by a manufacturer’s representative. The plaintiff alleged that she had an oral or implied contract with 7-Eleven pursuant to which the plaintiff agreed to not represent her customers with respect to sales to any convenience stores other than 7-Eleven and 7-Eleven agreed it would not terminate its relationship with her absent reasonable notice and good case. The motion argued that the plaintiff had no evidence of an agreement sufficiently definite to be enforceable. The court granted the motion and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims. This brief was filed by Heygood, Orr & Pearson on behalf of their client.