Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Morgan Buildings and Spas, Inc. v. Humane Society of Southeast Texas

Texas Court of Appeals
249 S.W.3d 480 (2008)


Cynthia Meyers went to Morgan Buildings and Spas, Inc. (Morgan) (defendant) to purchase a storage facility on behalf of the Humane Society of Southeast Texas (Humane) (plaintiff). Meyers informed Carey Sonnier, a Morgan representative, that she needed a carport that would (1) have sides and two sets of double doors, (2) be secure to prevent rodent infestation and weather damage, (3) be able to accommodate Humane’s pre-existing shelving, and (4) have almond-colored sides with green roofing and trim. Meyers furnished a down payment for the carport. The written purchase agreement provided that Morgan agreed to manufacture and deliver a steel-frame building of a certain size, with custom doors, almond coloring, and green roofing and trim. The agreement contained a merger-and-integration clause stating that the writing included the entire agreement between the parties. The contract further stated in large, bold writing that Morgan made no warranties and would not be responsible for any damages arising from performance. Meyers and Sonnier also signed a separate document indicating that Morgan would install an almond-colored building of a different size with a green roof and trim. After construction, Meyers noticed that the carport was the wrong color, was rusted, and had holes in the roof. The building was also too short and contained internal bracing, preventing Humane from installing its shelves or storing animal food. Sonnier’s attempts to fix the issues failed. Humane brought suit against Morgan for breach of contract. The trial court found in Humane’s favor, ordering Morgan to pay significant damages. Morgan appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.


The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Gaultney, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence/Dissent (McKeithen, J.)

The concurrence/dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the judge’s concurrence in part and dissent in part.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.