law-oral-contract | statute of frauds | parol evidence rule | breach of contract | contract construction |

ORAL CONTRACT

The elements of written and oral contracts are the same and must be present for a contract to be binding.  Wal-
Mart Stores, Inc. v. Lopez, 93 S.W.3d 548, 555 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, no pet.).  A binding
contract must have an offer and an acceptance; the acceptance must be in strict compliance with the terms of the
offer.  Advantage Physical Therapy, Inc. v. Cruse, 165 S.W.3d 21, 25 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2005, no
pet.).  Generally, acceptance of an offer must be communicated to the offeror for a contract to be binding.  Id. at
26.  Thus, silence does not ordinarily indicate acceptance of an offer.  See id. (citing Restatement (Second) of
Contracts § 69(1) cmt. a (1981)); see also Tex. Ass’n of Counties County Gov’t Risk Mgmt. Pool v. Matagorda
County, 52 S.W.3d 128, 132 (Tex. 2000) (noting that “as a general rule, ‘silence and inaction will not be construed
as an assent to an offer’” (quoting 2 Williston on Contracts § 6:49 (4th ed. 1991))).  

The Levin Law Group, PC v. Sigmon (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 21, 2010)(Sullivan)
(
no breach of agreement to mediate on specific terms that were not agreed to, silence not assent, no meeting of
the minds on cancellation fee, unforceable contract not formed)
Appellant, the Levin Law Group, P.C. (“LLG”) filed suit against attorney Ernesto de Andre Sigmon for breach of an agreement to
mediate an underlying civil lawsuit.  The trial court granted Sigmon’s motion for summary judgment after Sigmon asserted, inter alia,
(a) he did not accept the terms of the agreement, (b) he did not reschedule or cancel the mediation, and (c) the statute of frauds
operated to bar the alleged oral contract.  We affirm the judgment.
AFFIRMED: Opinion by Justice Kent Sullivan     
Before    
14-08-01165-CV   The Levin Law Group, P.C. v. Ernesto De Andre Sigmon    
Appeal from Co Civil Ct at Law No 4 of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:  
Roberta Anne Lloyd

Lee v. Hasson (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 30, 2007)(Guzman)
(oral contract, enforceability, investor, broker)
REVERSED AND RENDERED: Opinion by Justice Guzman
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Brock Yates and Guzman
14-05-00004-CV        Lanna F. Lee (fka Lanna Pai) and B. Lanna Inc. v. Theodore Hasson Et Al
Appeal from 129th District Court of Harris County (name of judge not shown on docket)


TEXAS CAUSES OF ACTION ELEMENTS | HOUSTON CASE LAW |  HOUSTON COURTS OF APPEALS |
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS
HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE