Dean A. Smith Sales, Inc. D/B/A the Dean Group v. Metal Systems, Inc.
2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 2179
| Tex. App. | 2013Background
- Dean was granted an exclusive right to sell Metal's business under a July 2008 listing agreement that included real estate.
- The listing set a $4,580,000 sale price with real estate included and ran for one year unless terminated by notice.
- Dean sued Metal on May 27, 2010 for breach of written contract and quantum meruit seeking $160,300.
- Metal moved for traditional and no-evidence summary judgment; Dean amended to include breach of oral contract claim.
- The trial court granted summary judgment on breach of written and oral contracts but denied summary judgment on quantum meruit, which Dean nonsuited.
- Dean appealed, and the court affirmed, holding RELA applied due to real estate inclusion and that oral contract claim was unenforceable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| No-evidence MSJ on breach of written contract valid? | Dean contends genuine issues exist on contract validity. | Metal asserts no evidence of license at signing defeats contract enforceability. | Yes; no evidence proper because Dean lacked license at signing. |
| Oral contract claim barred under RELA? | Oral contract mirrored written terms; RELA does not apply since no real estate sale. | RELA applies because sale involved real estate; oral contract unenforceable. | RELA applies; oral claim unenforceable. |
| Whether crosspoint on quantum meruit survives after nonsuit? | Dean preserved quantum meruit claim; nonsuit should not affect review. | Nonsuit removes quantum meruit from dispute and this Court lacks jurisdiction. | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to nonsuit. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ford Motor Co. v. Ridgway, 135 S.W.3d 598 (Tex. 2004) (no-evidence summary judgment standard)
- LMB, Ltd. v. Moreno, 201 S.W.3d 686 (Tex. 2006) (no-evidence MSJ framework)
- Lathem v. Kruse, 290 S.W.3d 922 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009) (RELA compliance required for real estate commissions)
- Fimberg v. F.D.I.C., 880 S.W.2d 83 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1994) (parol evidence limits on extrinsic contradictions)
- Rosemont Enters., Inc. v. Lummis, 596 S.W.2d 916 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1980) (parol evidence limitations on contract terms)