R.J. Suarez Enterprises Inc. v. PNYX L.P.
380 S.W.3d 238
Tex. App.2012Background
- Suarez Enterprises owned a sandwich shop and leased its premises; ownership of the disputed equipment (walk-in cooler/freezer, sandwich unit, beverage cooler, ice machine) was contested between Suarez and the property owners GAMR, then transferred to PNYX, with Mantas as property manager.
- Lease expired May 31, 2010; PNYX and Suarez entered a holdover period; on June 5–7, 2010, PNYX, GAMR, Mantas, and later Sam Kim asserted control over the disputed property.
- Suarez filed suit for conversion and related claims; defendants answered and asserted counterclaims for breach of the lease, trespass, and tortious interference.
- Trial court ruled for Suarez on conversion but awarded take-nothing due to lack of evidence on fair market value; ruled against Suarez on other claims and denied attorney’s fees.
- PNYX, GAMR, and Mantas cross-appealed contending Suarez breached the lease; the trial court’s findings of no breach were upheld on appeal.
- This opinion affirms the trial court’s conclusions that fair market value is the proper damages measure for conversion, there was some market value for the converted property, and Suarez did not breach the lease; attorney’s fees were denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Damages for conversion: FMV vs replacement cost | Suarez urged replacement cost as proper measure. | Defendants argued FMV not required; replacement cost adequate. | FMV is the proper damages measure; replacement cost not adequate. |
| Damages for conversion: return of property plus loss of use | Suarez elected to seek return of property and loss of use damages. | Election to damages precluded return of property relief. | Return plus loss of use is not proper where plaintiff elects money damages; FMV governs. |
| Sufficiency of FMV evidence | Evidence showed FMV or replacement value; no FMV offered. | Evidence supported FMV findings and replacement cost is not FMV. | There was some market value evidence; replacement cost alone not FMV; findings upheld. |
| Breach of the lease by Suarez | PNYX, GAMR, Mantas contended Suarez breached by nonpayment and other acts. | Suarez fully complied; holdover rent disputed but undisputed as to triple net charges. | No breach proven; findings upheld against cross-claimants. |
| Attorney’s fees | Fees should be awarded if conversion related to contract. | Fees generally unavailable for conversion unless intertwined with contract and damages awarded. | Fees denied; conversion claim not awardable damages-related fees. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wiese v. Pro Am Svcs. Inc., 317 S.W.3d 857 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2010) (FMV required to support damages in conversion)
- Varel Mfg. Co. v. Acetylene Oxygen Co., 990 S.W.2d 486 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1999) (damages in conversion generally FMV at time of conversion)
- United Mobile Networks L.P. v. Deaton, 939 S.W.2d 146 (Tex. 1997) (FMV as measure of damages for conversion)
- Horlock v. Horlock, 614 S.W.2d 478 (Tex.Civ.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1981) (election of remedies in conversion cases governs damages)
- Storms v. Reid, 691 S.W.2d 73 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1985) (equitable discretion in remedy selection in torts)
- Dow Chem. Co. v. Francis, 46 S.W.3d 237 (Tex. 2001) (legal sufficiency standards for evidence in appeals)
- Casey Int'l-Great N. R.R. Co. v. Casey, 46 S.W.2d 669 (Tex.Comm’n App. 1932) (replacement cost not sole measure in conversion; context defect)
- Bundren v. Holly Oaks Townhomes Ass’n Inc., 347 S.W.3d 421 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2011) (de novo review of legal conclusions; standards of review)
- BMC Software Belgium N.V. v. Marchand, 83 S.W.3d 789 (Tex. 2002) (review of legal conclusions; proper judgment despite erroneous conclusion)
- Mc—, — () (additional cited authorities referenced in opinion)