Corman v. Fabrique, Inc.

806 S.W.2d 801, 1991 WL 40890
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedMay 8, 1991
DocketD-0483
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 806 S.W.2d 801 (Corman v. Fabrique, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Corman v. Fabrique, Inc., 806 S.W.2d 801, 1991 WL 40890 (Tex. 1991).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a lawsuit by Fabrique, Inc., the assignee of lessee’s interest in a lease, against the lessor, Jack Corman, for wrongful withholding of possession of the leasehold. Corman counterclaimed against Fabrique for back rent. Both Fabrique and Corman moved for partial summary judgment. Fabrique’s offensive and defensive theories are based on its allegations that Corman had wrongfully interfered with Fabrique’s possession of the leasehold. Corman moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the evidence showed as a matter of law that he was entitled to back rent and he did not wrongfully interfere with Fabrique’s possession of the premises.

The trial court granted partial summary judgment for Corman for back rent, and against Fabrique on its claims for damages against Corman. The trial court rendered final judgment after a hearing on attorney fees. The court of appeals reversed and remanded. 796 S.W.2d 790.

Fabrique’s principal summary judgment proof is an affidavit from Fabrique’s attorney, that on one occasion Corman had threatened to sue for trespass if Fabrique entered the premises, and a letter from Corman’s attorney in which he states on Corman’s behalf that Corman had wrongfully withheld possession of the premises from Fabrique. The letter from Corman’s attorney is some evidence which would preclude summary judgment in favor of Cor-man, and the court of appeals correctly remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings. Accordingly we deny petitioner’s application for writ of error. We expressly reserve the question of whether a threat of litigation by a landlord is an interference with the tenant’s possession sufficient to give rise to a cause of action for damages.

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

Related

Darnell Hartsfield v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2010
In Re McDaniel
149 S.W.3d 860 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2004)
Super Wash, Inc. v. City of White Settlement
131 S.W.3d 249 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2004)
Maguire Oil Co. v. City of Houston
69 S.W.3d 350 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2002)
Maguire Oil Company v. City of Houston
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2002
718 Associates, Ltd. v. Sunwest N.O.P., Inc.
1 S.W.3d 355 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)
Foster v. State
976 S.W.2d 732 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998)
Robinson v. Robinson
961 S.W.2d 292 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1997)
Twelve Oaks Tower I, Ltd. v. Premier Allergy, Inc.
938 S.W.2d 102 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1997)
Wallace v. McKinzie
869 S.W.2d 592 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
806 S.W.2d 801, 1991 WL 40890, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corman-v-fabrique-inc-tex-1991.