York Group, Inc. v. Horizon Casket Group, Inc.

3 Citing cases

  1. Cypress Engine Accessories, LLC v. HDMS Ltd. Co.

    CIVIL ACTION NO. H-15-2227 (S.D. Tex. May. 3, 2017)   Cited 1 times
    Considering extrinsic evidence on summary judgment to construe the terms and conditions of the parties' agreement

    Under federal and Texas law, a court may look to extrinsic evidence to determine whether a writing is a complete expression of the parties' agreement and therefore a partially or fully integrated agreement. See The York Grp., Inc. v. Horizon Casket Grp., Inc., Civ. No. 05-2181, 2007 WL 2021763, at *4 (S.D. Tex. July 11, 2007) (quoting Pennzoil Co. v. F.E.R.C., 645 F.2d 360, 388 (5th Cir. 1981). There is no indication in the email string or the one-page outline that the outline, standing alone, was intended to be the parties' fully integrated agreement.

  2. Johnson v. PPI Technology Services, L.P.

    3 F. Supp. 3d 553 (E.D. La. 2014)   Cited 2 times

    ” Theatre Time Clock, Inc. v. Stewart, 276 F.Supp. 593, 599 (E.D.La. Nov. 29, 1967); 17A C.J.S. Contracts § 252 (“An illegal agreement is void.”) According to the Restatement (Second) of Contracts, a “promise for breach of which the law neither gives a remedy nor otherwise recognizes a duty of performance by the promisor is often called a void contract,” and “such a promise is not a contract at all.” Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 7 (Comment (a)) (1981); York Grp., Inc. v. Horizon Casket Grp., Inc., 06–0262, 2007 WL 2120419 (S.D.Tex. July 10, 2007) (“A ‘void contract’ is defined as a contract that is of no legal effect, so that there is really no contract in existence at all.”)(internal citation omitted).

  3. In re Decker Oaks Development II, Ltd.

    Case No. 07-35557, Adversary No. 07-03421 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Jun. 5, 2008)

    A suit for tortious interference with an existing contract requires a valid contract. York Group, Inc. v. Horizon Casket Group, Inc., 2007 WL 2120419, at *2 (S.D. Tex. July 10, 2007) (applying Texas law); S A Marinas, Inc. v. Leonard Marine Corp., 875 S.W.2d 766, 768 (Tex.App.-Austin 1994, writ denied). "A cause of action for tortious interference will not lie in the absence of a contract."