Alkire v. Dugan Drug Stores, Inc.

468 S.W.2d 492, 1971 Tex. App. LEXIS 2941
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 3, 1971
DocketNo. 15765
StatusPublished

This text of 468 S.W.2d 492 (Alkire v. Dugan Drug Stores, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Alkire v. Dugan Drug Stores, Inc., 468 S.W.2d 492, 1971 Tex. App. LEXIS 2941 (Tex. Ct. App. 1971).

Opinion

COLEMAN, Justice.

This is a suit to recover the balance due under a contract for the sale of 32,000 shares of the common stock of Dugan Drug Stores, Inc., and under a note given for the purchase price as required by said contract. Appellant appeals from an adverse judgment entered after a jury trial. The principal issue is the interpretation to be given a provision of the contract requiring a reduction in the price of the stock under certain conditions. The judgment is reversed.

T.- B. Alkire, deceased, entered into a contract with appellees, embodied in three written instruments dated May 15, 1963, to sell to Dugan Drug Stores, Inc., the shares of stock in that corporation owned by him for $3.00 per share. In accordance with the agreement between the corporation, Dugan, and Alkire, the corporation executed a promissory note for $96,000.00, payable $1,000.00 each month beginning on the first day of February, 1964, bearing interest after maturity at the rate of 10% per annum and providing for 10% attorney’s fee. The parties entered into an escrow agreement whereby this note, certain other notes representing indebtedness due Alkire from the corporation, and the shares of stock, were placed in escrow with a bank to be delivered under specified conditions.

One instrument provided for the sale of the stock in consideration of a note for $96,000.00 payable $1,000.00 per month, and that the stock should be placed in escrow until the note was fully paid. Other provisions, which need not be discussed, were included in the agreement.

The provisions of this instrument were modified, and changed in some respects, by. a “supplemental agreement” bearing the same date. The provision giving rise to this controversy reads:

“1. In the event that all of the outstanding shares of corporate stock of Dugan Drug Stores, Inc. should be sold by J. S. Dugan for an amount less than $3.00 per share, Party of the First Part (T. B. Alkire) agrees to proportionately reduce the sales price of the shares of stock sold under the abovementioned contract to correspond with the sales price per share received by J. S. Dugan from a bona fide sale of his controlling interest in said corporation; provided that said consideration be paid in cash.”

While these instruments were dated May 15, 1963, the acknowledgments were dated December 27, 1963. On January 2, 1964, the corporation passed the following resolution :

“Resolved: that this meeting is to confirm and ratify contract dated May 15, 1963, between T. B. Alkire, as Seller and Dugan Drug Stores, Inc. as Buyer, and personally endorsed and guaranteed by J. S. Dugan, individually, of said contract, notes and other agreements; whereby they have contracted to buy [494]*49432,000 shares of stock (common stock) at a price of $3.00 per share, issuing note in the amount of Ninety Six Thousand ($96,000.00) Dollars, payable in monthly installments of $1,000.00 each, without interest; first payment to be made February 1, 1964 and a like payment each month thereafter until said note is paid in full.
“This ratification and confirmation has been delayed, due to the fact that certain negotiations for the sale or merger of the Corporation has been going on for the past several months, and at this time these negotiations have been concluded without any results.”

At the time these documents were executed, J. S. Dugan was president of the corporation, T. B. Alkire was secretary-treasurer, and C. R. Caldwell, Jr., was vice president. They constituted the board of directors of the corporation. Dugan owned 275,000 shares of the corporation common stock. There were 31,600 shares owned by others than Dugan and Alkire.

In May or June 1967, J. S. Dugan sold his stock in the corporation to Mading Drug Stores. He testified that he received $387,000.00, plus “a little interest”. He explained that “it was paid, $203,000.00 plus the accrued interest, to McKesson & Robbins and $184,000.00, plus interest, to Mad-ing’s Drug Stores,’ which was my personal obligation.” From other testimony it appears that the $184,000.00 was a debt due to Dugan Drug Stores, Inc., which was satisfied in some manner by Mading Drug Stores. The $203,000.00 account due to McKesson & Robbins was an obligation of Dugan Drug Stores, Inc., which was secured by certain property owned by J. S. Dugan. McKesson & Robbins was threatening to foreclose on the property at the time. Mading Drug Stores later acquired the outstanding shares.

The comptroller of Mading-Dugan Drug Stores, Inc., testified that the books of the company reflected a payment of $206,814.-99 to McKesson & Robbins in June 1967, and a payment in the amount of $184,000.-00 credited against the drawing account of Mr. Dugan. He testified that this was an intercompany entry having the effect of a cash transaction. The obligation was transferred from Dugan to Mading-Dugan Drug Stores, Inc. There was other testimony that Mr. Dugan was paid $390,000.00 for his stock in cash. This witness was not permitted to testify as to the exact procedure followed in making the payment.

Prior to June 1967, Mr. Alkire received the $1,000.00 payments monthly as they became due. At the time Mading’s Drug Stores purchased Mr. Dugan’s stock the balance sheet of Dugan Drug Stores, Inc., showed an outstanding balance due to T. B. Alkire of $56,000.00. The $1,000.00 payment on the note made in June 1967 recited on its face a balance due to T. B. Al-kire of $55,000.00, and the July payment recited a balance due of $54,000.00. There was testimony that the books of the company reflected a balance due to Mr. Alkire of $3,760.00 as of June 30, 1967. On October 2, 1967, the corporation tendered a check for $1,760.00 as final payment of the Al-kire note. The tender was refused.

The jury found that the phrase, “In the event that all of the outstanding shares of corporate stock of Dugan Drug Stores, Inc., should be sold by J. S. Dugan,” as used in the supplementary agreement was intended by the parties to mean a sale of “all the outstanding shares of stock owned by J. S. Dugan in said corporation.”

It also found that the phrase, “provided that said consideration be paid in cash,” as used in the supplementary agreement was intended by the parties to mean that the consideration for the shares" of stock owned by J. S. Dugan be paid in cash, and that J. S. Dugan was paid in cash.

The original sales agreement, the supplementary agreement, the note and the escrow agreement are all parts of the contract of the parties and must be construed together to arrive at the intention of the parties and the meaning to be given the [495]*495language used in the contract. Guadalupe-Bianco River Authority v. City of San Antonio, 145 Tex. 611, 200 S.W.2d 989 (1947). The cardinal rule of construction of unambiguous contracts is to ascertain the intention of the parties as expressed in the language used in the instrument itself. Citizens National Bank in Abilene v. Texas & Pacific R. Co., 136 Tex. 333, 150 S.W.2d 1003 (1941) ; Reconstruction Finance Corporation v. Gossett, 130 Tex. 535, 111 S.W.2d 1066 (1938).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ervay, Inc. v. Wood
373 S.W.2d 380 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1963)
Reconstruction Finance Corp. v. Gossett
111 S.W.2d 1066 (Texas Supreme Court, 1938)
Brown v. Payne
176 S.W.2d 306 (Texas Supreme Court, 1943)
Citizens National Bank v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.
150 S.W.2d 1003 (Texas Supreme Court, 1941)
Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority v. City of San Antonio
200 S.W.2d 989 (Texas Supreme Court, 1947)
Turner v. Montgomery
293 S.W. 815 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
468 S.W.2d 492, 1971 Tex. App. LEXIS 2941, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alkire-v-dugan-drug-stores-inc-texapp-1971.