Solar Applications Engineering v. T. A. Operating - The Appellate ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Vance v. My Apartment Steak House of San Antonio, Inc., 677 S.W.2d 480 (Tex.1984) ........................................4, 6 Statutes TEX. PROP. CODE § 162.032 ...............................................14 TEX. PROP. CODE § 53.021 .................................................4 TEX. PROP. CODE § 53.023 .................................................4 v
STATEMENT OF THE CASE Nature of the Case and Parties: Trial Court: Trial Court’s Disposition: Court of Appeals: Court of Appeals’ Disposition: Suit between general contractor, Solar Applications Engineering, Inc., and owner, T.A. Operating Corporation, arising out of contract to construct $4-million truck stop. Solar sued for the unpaid balance under the contract. TA counterclaimed for alleged delays and defective work. The Honorable Patrick J. Boone, 57th Judicial District, Bexar County, Texas Judgment rendered on jury verdict in favor of Solar for $392,000, plus attorneys’ fees and costs; take-nothing judgment rendered against TA. (App. 1, 2) Fourth Court of Appeals; Justice Stone, joined by Justices Angelini and Marion. After initially affirming judgment in favor of Solar, on rehearing reversed and rendered judgment that Solar take nothing. T.A. Operating Corporation v. Solar Applications Engineering, Inc., No. 04-04-00180-CV 2005 WL 2401879 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 28, 2005, pet. filed) (App. 3). STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION The Supreme Court has jurisdiction of this case under Government Code section 22.001(a)(6), because this case presents an important issue of first impression involving the interpretation of contract provisions that are widely employed throughout the construction industry. ISSUE PRESENTED Is a general contractor who has substantially performed a construction contract required to provide lien releases from it and its subcontractors as a condition to sue an owner who has refused to pay for work done? vi
Page 1 and 2: NO. 06-0243 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTS IDENTITY OF PARTI
Page 5: INDEX OF AUTHORITIES Cases Atkinson
Page 9 and 10: providing that any damages recovere
Page 11 and 12: 212-213 (1891); Atkinson v. Jackson
Page 13 and 14: concerned.” Atkinson v. Jackson B
Page 15 and 16: completed most of the items that it
Page 17 and 18: formal Application for Final Paymen
Page 19 and 20: will result in a contract in terms
Page 21 and 22: and withheld from distribution to S
Page 23 and 24: Respectfully submitted, ALEXANDER D

Solar Applications Engineering v. T. A. Operating - The Appellate ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?