law-statutes-of-fraud | statute of frauds and real-estate transactions | statute of frauds in money lending loan
transactions | statute of frauds sales of goods UCC |


STATUTE OF FRAUDS DEFENSE


Alattar v. Ganim (Tex.App.- Houston [14th  Dist.] Feb. 18, 2010)(Hedges)
(real estate transaction, statute of frauds applies and was not satisfied, judgment reversed and take-nothing
judgment entered)
REVERSED AND RENDERED: Opinion by Chief Justice Hedges      
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Anderson and Boyce    
14-08-00756-CV  Farouck (Frank) Alattar v. John Ganim    
Appeal from 400th District Court of Fort Bend County
Trial Court Judge: Clifford J. Vacek


Lee-Way Prince Enterprises, LLC v. Qai Assurance, Inc. (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 29, 2009)(Bland)
(award of attorney’s fees on contract breach attorney's fees for promissory estoppel claim, breach of contract,
breach of settlement  agreement, common-law fraud)
In its appellate briefing, Prince also challenged the enforceability of the cash flow statement under the statute of
frauds, but conceded this issue at oral argument.  We note that Prince did not raise the statute of frauds as an
affirmative defense in the trial court, nor was the issue tried by consent.  See Tex. R. Civ. P. 67, 92, 94; Double
Ace, Inc. v. Pope, 190 S.W.3d 18, 28 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2005, no pet.); Karbalai v. Solhjou, No. 01-01-00371-
CV, 2003 WL 1848448, at *4 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.).
AFFIRM TC JUDGMENT: Opinion by Justice Bland     
Before Chief Justice Radack, Justices Bland and Massengale  
01-07-01004-CV Lee-Way Prince Enterprises, LLC v. Qai Assurance, Inc. and Arthur Kwok   
Appeal from 269th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: Hon. John T. Wooldridge     


Baylor Univ. v. Sonnichsen, No. 04-0851 (Tex. Apr. 20, 2007)(per curiam) (employment dispute)
(fraud damages barred where same damages sought in unenforceable oral contract)
Because these benefit-of-the-bargain damages are the same damages Sonnichsen sought to recover under an
unenforceable contract, his fraud claim fails. See Nagle v. Nagle, 633 S.W.2d 796, 801 (Tex. 1982); see also
Formosa Plastics, 960 S.W.2d at 46-47 (noting that except fraudulent inducement, contract duties and damages
may not be pursued in common law tort). The trial court correctly granted summary judgment in favor of Baylor
on Sonnichsen’s fraud claims. . . .
We hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by sustaining Baylor’s special exception on Sonnichsen’s
breach of contract claims and the trial court correctly granted summary judgment in favor of Baylor on
Sonnichsen’s fraud claim. Therefore, without granting oral argument, we grant the petition for review, reverse
the judgment of the court of appeals, and render judgment that Sonnichsen take nothing.


BACM-2001 San Felipe Road  LP v. Trafalgar Holdings I Ltd 218 S.W.3d 137 (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.]
Jan. 11, 2007)(Opinion by Justice Guzman) (commercial loan, breach of contract, statute of frauds)
REVERSED AND RENDERED: Opinion by Justice Guzman
(Before Justices Anderson, Hudson and Guzman)
14-05-00476-CV     BACM-2001 San Felipe Road Limited Partnership Et Al v. Trafalgar Holdings I Ltd Et Al--
Appeal from 133rd District Court of Harris County (Judge Lamar McCorkle)    

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

HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE