Case Study of Donnie Mcgraw
Case Project Written Job
February 21, 2012
DONNIE McGRAW, Appellant v. BROWN REALTY ORGANIZATION, Appellee
INFORMATION: Donnie McGraw signed a lease with Brown Realty Company located at 7307 South Westmorland Road, Dallas, Texas where he would be managing a restaurant. In December twenty four, 2003 when ever McGraw fixed the contract he arranged that the rental would be by February 15, 2004 through February 13, 2009 where he would be spending $3, 435.00 a month a totaling $207, 000 towards the end. On Mar 3, 2005 McGraw directed Gary Brownish, the director of Brownish Realty Company, a notice informing him of several equipment requiring repair furthermore he dispatched him an additional letter about October your five, 2004 stressing that the roof of the building was dripping, there was under no circumstances a react from Darkish Realty. Documents showed that McGraw manufactured his lease payment promptly from Drive through March of 2005; however in The fall of rent repayment was delivered for not enough funds which in turn he then forgotten the building in January. Brown sued McGraw pertaining to breach of contract in early February aiming to collect the outstanding and unpaid lease, late charges, past due portions and the remaining base hire at an overall total of $176, 467. 60. In late 03, McGraw submitted his unique answer and affirmative defense. Later in late June Brown Realty moved to get traditional brief summary judgment about its breach of contract claim, this individual claimed it had mitigated its damages simply by securing a fresh tenant. McGraw then took action by simply filing his own traditional summary view on his defense. The path court after that in favor of Brownish Realty entered summary view on their break of deal asserted to get $114, 714. ISSUES: Set up Trial court's final brief summary judgment in favour of Brown Real estate Company will proceed since Donnie McGraw argues that the trail court docket erred if they granted Dark brown motion for traditional summary judgment about its infringement of agreement.
DECISION: The Court of appeals concluded that the trail court erred...