City of Terrell v. McFarland

I respectfully dissent. I would sustain point of error six, reverse the judgment of the trial court, and remand the cause for a new trial.

The majority holds that McFarland alleged that he and the city entered a contract that would entitle McFarland to a reimbursement if anyone subsequently connected to McFarland’s mains and that such a contract was in conformity with the requirements of the city ordinances regarding refunds. The majority holds that McFarland submitted this precise issue to the jury, the jury agreed with McFarland, *814and, therefore, McFarland is entitled to recover. The majority…