American International Industries, Inc. v. Scott, 355 S.W.3d 155

Surgicare and Giammalva entered into an earnest money contract for a Chambers County property; Giammalva later sued Surgicare in the Giammalva case.
In June 2004, All and Surgicare executed a real estate agreement under which All would buy five properties, with All indemnifying Surgicare’s fees in Giammalva.
Around the same time, All and Surgicare executed a stock agreement whereby All acquired Surgicare stock.
On March 28, 2005, Surgicare filed a cross-action against All in Giammalva seeking contractual contribution and indemnity.
On July 12, 2005, All sued Surgicare in Harris County alleging breach of the stock agreement and securities fraud.
On September 8, 2006, the All securities case settled releasing claims; on November 13, 2006, the Giammalva court awarded Surgicare substantial fees and expenses; All appealed but did not present the settlement in that appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Res judicata bars All’s claims	All argues res judicata does not bar post-judgment acts and seeks relief on release grounds	Surgicare proves release and final judgments bar second suit	Yes; res judicata bars All’s claims as arising from a release of indemnity and could have been raised earlier
Attorney’s fees under UDJA; segregation requirement	All contends fees were improperly awarded without segregating recoverable from unrecoverable	Surgicare showed fees relate to UDJA claims and were not segregated because all were recoverable	Yes; UDJA fees affirmed; no segregation required given interrelated claims
Affidavits struck; evidentiary rulings moot	Striking corporate and attorney affidavits prejudiced All	Evidence issues were moot since summary judgment upheld on res judicata	Moot; affirmed without addressing the affidavits

Miller v. State, 52 S.W.3d 696 (Tex. 2001) (elements of res judicata require final judgment, same parties, and same or litigable claims)
Barr v. Resolution Trust Corp., 837 S.W.2d 627 (Tex. 1992) (scope of res judicata extends to matters that arise out of same subject matter)
Igal v. Brightstar Info. Tech. Group, Inc., 250 S.W.3d 78 (Tex. 2007) (transactional approach to res judicata; claims could have been litigated in first suit)
Chapa v. Gullo, 212 S.W.3d 299 (Tex. 2006) (segregation of attorney’s fees when recoverable and unrecoverable claims are intertwined)
Doss v. Homecomings Fin. Network, Inc., 210 S.W.3d 706 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 2007) (UDJA fee awards; segregation principles and equitable allowances)
Compañía Financiara Libano, S.A. v. Simmons, 53 S.W.3d 365 (Tex. 2001) (settlement timing; release defenses in res judicata context)