Deep Nines, Inc. v. McAfee, Inc.
Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Opinion by
Justice MORRIS.
In a single issue on appeal, Deep Nines, Inc. contends the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of McAfee, Inc. because there are genuine issues of material fact about Deep Nines’s alleged breach of contract. After reviewing the record, we conclude the summary judgment was proper and we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
I
In 2006, McAfee sued Deep Nines for breach of a contract to pay royalties. The suit was resolved through mediation and a settlement agreement. Under the settlement agreement, Deep Nines agreed to pay McAfee $345,000 in seven…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Coker v. CokerTexas Supreme Court · 1983
- Mustang Pipeline Co. v. Driver Pipeline Co.Texas Supreme Court · 2004
- Kennedy Ship & Repair, L.P. v. Pham, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2006
- Probus Properties v. Kirby, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2006
- Oryx Energy Co. v. Union National Bank of Texas, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Texas Department of Public Safety v. J.H.J., Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2008
- New York Party Shuttle, LLC v. John Bilello, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2013
- TrueStar Petroleum Corp. v. Eagle Oil & Gas Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2010
- Mayfield v. KoroghliNevada Supreme Court · 2008
- Midcontinent Express Pipeline, LLC v. Man Industries (INDIA), Ltd, Prime Pipe International, Inc., and the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2013
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.