Solar Applications Engineering, Inc. v. T.A. Operating Corporation
Texas Supreme Court
327 S.W.3d 104 (2010)
- Written by Lauren Petersen, JD
Facts
T.A. Operating Corporation (TA) (defendant) hired Solar Applications Engineering, Inc. (Solar) to build a truck stop. Under the terms of TA’s contract with Solar, TA would pay Solar monthly in accordance with Solar’s progress on the project. Once the project was substantially complete, Solar would notify TA, and TA would inspect the project. TA would then provide Solar with a list of items needing correction or completion, called a “punch list.” Once Solar addressed the punch list, Solar could make a final application for payment. The contract specified that the final application for payment should be accompanied by a lien-release affidavit. When Solar had substantially completed construction of the truck stop, TA provided Solar with a punch list. Solar disputed some of the items that TA insisted must be completed before final payment. TA and other subcontractors filed liens against the property. TA terminated its contract with Solar. Solar then submitted a final application for payment, but did not submit a lien-release affidavit. TA refused to pay Solar, claiming that because Solar had failed to submit a lien-release affidavit, Solar had failed to satisfy a condition precedent for payment. Solar sued TA, and the trial court awarded Solar $392,000 in damages. TA appealed. The appellate court reversed the trial court, holding that the lien-release provision of the parties’ contract was a condition precedent of payment that Solar had failed to satisfy. Solar appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wainwright, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.