Bache Halsey Stuart Shields, Inc. v. Alamo Savings Ass'n of Texas

Decision Date31 December 1980
Docket NumberNo. 16591,16591
Citation611 S.W.2d 706
PartiesBACHE HALSEY STUART SHIELDS, INCORPORATED, Appellant, v. ALAMO SAVINGS ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals
OPINION

CADENA, Chief Justice.

Plaintiff, Bache Halsey Stuart Shields, Incorporated (Bache), appeals from a summary judgment rendered in favor of defendant, Alamo Savings Association of Texas (Alamo), denying Bache's prayer seeking to prevent Alamo from leasing space to one of Bache's competitors in a building owned by Alamo.

Bache is engaged in the securities brokerage business and is presently renting space from Alamo in the Alamo Savings Tower. Prior to the execution of the lease agreement between the parties, Bache maintained its offices in the Gunter Hotel in downtown San Antonio. There is summary judgment evidence to the effect that Bache wished to move from downtown San Antonio in order "to get away from" Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., one of Bache's competitors whose place of business was "in close proximity" to Bache's downtown office.

In the lease agreement between Bache and Alamo, Alamo agreed to assume the future rental payments on the Gunter Hotel lease. The lease instrument contained an addendum which provided that Alamo "does hereby grant (Bache) the right to exclude any company engaged in the securities brokerage business as Lessee from the Alamo Savings Tower and the Gunter Hotel premises."

The lease instrument described the "leased premises" as "consisting of approximately 5,465 square feet situated on the ground Floor(s) of the Alamo Savings Tower (the 'Building'), located on Lot 28, Block 1, New City Block 12571 in the City of San Antonio ... and having a street address of 901 N.E. Loop 410." At the time the exclusionary clause was being negotiated, Alamo made public its plans to construct a second tower 100 feet away from the first tower on the same Lot 28, with the two buildings to be connected by an enclosed mall or atrium. Alamo had earlier informed Bache of these plans.

In April, 1976, Bache entered into possession of the leased premises in Alamo Savings Tower. Subsequently, Alamo began construction of the second tower, but the plans for the second building had been modified by eliminating the enclosed mall or atrium connecting the second building to the first. On September 12, 1979, Alamo agreed to lease space in the second tower to Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., a competitor whose previous office was in "close proximity" to Bache's office in the Gunter Hotel. This second lease described the leased premises as consisting of "approximately 12,411 square feet situated on the first floor of the eight-story office building ... to be constructed on the East 1/2 of Lot 28, Block 1, New City Block 12571, in the City of San Antonio, ... and having a proposed...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • McGinnis v. Union Pacific R. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • March 16, 2009
    ...Ins. Co. of America, 972 S.W.2d 738, 741 (Tex. 1998) (court examined surrounding circumstances); Bache Halsey Stuart Shields, Incorp. v. Alamo Savings Assoc. of Texas, 611 S.W.2d 706, 708 (Tex.Civ.App.-San Antonio 1980, no writ) (quoting Murphy v. Dilworth, 137 Tex. 32, 151 S.W.2d 1004, 100......
  • STATE EX REL. WA, 20010081.
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • December 20, 2002
    ... ... SDNCO, Inc., 2002 UT 83, ¶ 10, 54 P.3d 1131 (internal ... resided in a Texas penitentiary, and E.A. resided in an Oklahoma ... ...
  • National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. CBI Industries, Inc.
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • October 5, 1995
    ...reason of some collateral matter. 4 See Murphy v. Dilworth, 137 Tex. 32, 151 S.W.2d 1004 (1941); see also Bache Halsey Stuart Shields, Inc. v. Alamo Sav. Ass'n, 611 S.W.2d 706, 708 (Tex.Civ.App.--San Antonio 1980, no writ). If a latent ambiguity arises from this application, parol evidence ......
  • Forderhause v. Cherokee Water Co.
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • August 25, 1981
    ...Co., 432 S.W.2d 515 (Tex.1968); Spence & Howe Construction Co. v. Gulf Oil Corp., 365 S.W.2d 631 (Tex.1963); Bache Halsey Stuart, Etc. v. Alamo Sav. Ass'n, 611 S.W.2d 706 (Tex.Civ.App.-San Antonio 1980, no writ); City of Houston v. McCarthy, 340 S.W.2d 559 (Tex.Civ.App.-Waco 1960, writ ref'......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT