Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP v. Kingwood CrossRoads, L.P.
This text of Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP v. Kingwood CrossRoads, L.P. (Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP v. Kingwood CrossRoads, L.P.) 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.
Opinion
In The
Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-14-00316-CV ____________________
CHEVRON PHILLIPS CHEMICAL COMPANY LP, Appellant
V.
KINGWOOD CROSSROADS, L.P., Appellee _______________________________________________________ ______________
On Appeal from the 410th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 14-04-04123 CV ________________________________________________________ _____________
ORDER
Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP (“CP Chem”) filed a motion to
abate the appeal and to remand the case to the trial court for entry of findings of
fact and conclusions of law. In an earlier appeal from the underlying trial, the
appellate court reversed part of the judgment on the jury’s verdict and remanded
the case to the trial court “for determination of the amount of attorneys’ fees
Kingwood CrossRoads[, L.P.] is entitled to recover for its defense of CP Chem’s
breach-of-contract claim.” See Chevron Phillips Chem. Co. LP v. Kingwood
1 CrossRoads, L.P., 346 S.W.3d 37, 78 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, pet.
denied). The Court of Appeals instructed that the case was remanded “for
Kingwood CrossRoads to segregate these fees or demonstrate segregation is not
required and for the trial court to determine the amount of fees recoverable for
defense of CP Chem’s contract claim.” Id. at 70. On remand, the trial court
determined that the amount of attorneys’ fees recoverable by Kingwood
Crossroads, L.P. (“KCR”) for its defense of CP Chem’s contract claim is
$2,648,101.50 plus post-judgment interest and additional sums in the event of
further appeals. The trial court denied CP Chem’s request for findings of fact and
conclusions of law. In its response filed in opposition to the appellant’s motion to
abate, KCR argues that CP Chem is not entitled to findings of fact and conclusions
of law because the proceeding on remand was not evidentiary in nature.
We abate the appeal and remand the case to the trial court for entry of
findings of fact and conclusions of law. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 298. If the trial court
resolved all issues as questions of law, without deciding any facts, it shall so state
in its conclusions of law. The trial court shall allow the parties ten days after the
trial court signs its findings of fact and conclusions of law to request additional
findings and conclusions. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 298. The appeal is abated and all
appellate timetables are suspended while the case is before the trial court. A
2 supplemental record, including any findings of fact made by the trial court and the
trial court’s conclusions of law, any additional findings and conclusions requested
by the parties, and any additional or amended findings and conclusions made by
the trial court, shall be filed with the Court of Appeals by October 28, 2014. The
appeal will be reinstated without further order of this Court when the supplemental
clerk’s record is filed. The brief of the appellant shall be due thirty days after the
supplemental clerk’s record is filed with the Court of Appeals.
ORDER ENTERED September 18, 2014.
PER CURIAM
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LP v. Kingwood CrossRoads, L.P., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chevron-phillips-chemical-company-lp-v-kingwood-cr-texapp-2014.