Continental Foods, Inc. v. Rossmore Enterprises, 05-11-01668-CV

Continental Foods, Inc. sued Rossmore Enterprises after condemnation of property under a Master Lease and sublease; the leasehold terminated upon condemnation, leaving no compensable interest per a prior opinion.
Continental asserted two breach theories: (a) failure to require a Special Commissioner's hearing to allocate condemnation proceeds; (b) failure to tender Continental’s share of the proceeds under the Master Lease.
Rossmore moved for summary judgment arguing collateral estoppel barred Continental’s claims by the prior appellate ruling; the trial court granted summary judgment.
Appellate review governed by de novo standard; the prior opinion did not decide the pre-condemnation obligations, only post-termination rights, so collateral estoppel did not bar the claim.
The court reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment and remanded for further proceedings; attorney’s fees issue was not addressed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Collateral estoppel bars the breach claim?	Continental argues estoppel does not apply.	Rossmore contends issue was fully litigated.	No collateral estoppel bar.
Whether there are genuine issues pre-condemnation breach and damages?	There was a breach before condemnation and damages.	The record supports summary judgment.	Remand for further proceedings; summary judgment reversed.

Nixon v. Mr. Prop. Mgmt. Co., 690 S.W.2d 546 (Tex. 1985) (standard for traditional summary judgment; burden on movant)
Mira Mar Dev. Corp. v. City of Coppell, 364 S.W.3d 366 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012) (de novo review; precludes summary judgment if issues exist)
MGA Ins. Co. v. Charles R. Chesnutt, P.C., 353 S.W.3d 808 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012) (collateral estoppel requires fully and fairly litigated issues)