RGS, Cardox Recovery, Inc. v. Dorchester Enhanced Recovery Co.
Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DORSEY, Justice.
This is an appeal from a summary judgment in an action for interpretation or reformation of the terms of a joint venture agreement. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The disputed language within paragraph 9.2 of the Joint Venture Agreement, entitled Management Committee, provides in part: “No Management Committee meeting may be held or action taken unless voting members representing aggregate venture percentages of at least seventy-five percent (75%) are present and voting, and all decisions except as otherwise herein provided shall be by majority vote....”…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Coker v. CokerTexas Supreme Court · 1983
- R & P Enterprises v. LaGuarta, Gavrel & Kirk, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1980
- Stone v. Lawyers Title Ins. Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 1977
- Capitol Rod & Gun Club v. Lower Colorado River AuthorityCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1981
- Alkas v. United Sav. Ass'n of Texas, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1984
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Palmer v. Miller Brewing Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1993
- Keenan v. Gibraltar Savings Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1988
- Hofland v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1995
- Preston Ridge Financial Services Corp. v. Tyler, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1990
- Derr Construction Co. v. City of HoustonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1992
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.