Towers of Texas, Inc. v. J & J Systems, Inc.

Decision Date22 April 1992
Docket NumberNo. D-1192,D-1192
Citation834 S.W.2d 1,35 Tex.Sup.Ct.J. 659
PartiesTOWERS OF TEXAS, INC., Petitioner, v. J & J SYSTEMS, INC., Gary Todd Baugh, David Lynn Baugh, Bruce Perrin Baugh, Stephen Scott Baugh and Frances Edmonia Baugh White, Respondents.
CourtTexas Supreme Court

William H. Hicks, Abilene, for petitioner.

Mary Ann Fergus, Donald N. Seamster, David M. Hurst, Abilene, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The issue in this case is whether the trial court properly found that a real property lease purporting to lease a single point for construction of a broadcasting tower was ambiguous. The case was tried to the court, which held the property description in the lease was ambiguous and resolved the factual issue of the location of the leased premises in favor of Towers of Texas, Inc. (Towers), as assignee of the lease. The court of appeals reversed the trial court judgment and rendered judgment for the lessor. 833 S.W.2d 532. The court of appeals held that the lease was unambiguous as a matter of law and that the property description standards for a deed applied to a real property lease. We disagree and hold that the lease is ambiguous as a matter of law because its property description technically describes only a point on the earth's surface and its meaning is otherwise unclear from the face of the document. We reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and remand the cause to that court for consideration of insufficient evidence points.

Towers was assigned a long-term lease for a radio broadcasting tower site. The lease provided:

Lessor hereby leases to Lessee a site on the top of Double Mountain coordinates 33? 03' 55"' latitude, 110? 26' 20"' longitude and elevation approximately 2590 feet above sea level for the purpose of erecting and maintaining a radio transmission tower....

Lessee shall have the exclusive use of the space on top of said Double Mountain hereinabove described for said radio transmission tower and lessor shall not lease any space on top of said Double Mountain for said purpose to any other party.

Towers' predecessor in interest built the radio tower on a flat and accessible site on top of the mountain, but not where the geographical coordinates described. The lessors, the Baughs, and J & J Systems, Inc. erected a second radio tower near that of Towers' existing tower. Asserting rights under the lease language that lessee had "the exclusive use of the space on top" of Double Mountain for radio tower purposes, Towers sued the Baughs and J & J Systems for damages for breach of the lease, for trespass, and for injunctive relief.

After a bench trial, the court filed findings of fact and conclusions of law. In particular, the trial court found that the geographical coordinates referenced in the lease indicated a point on the side of the mountain unsuitable for construction of a radio transmission tower, buildings, telephone poles, and a road; that the top was the only space on Double Mountain economically feasible for location and operation of a radio transmission tower; and that the original parties to the lease, as well as plaintiff and defendants, all interpreted the contract to be a lease of all the property on top of Double Mountain, and not a lease of only the point referenced by the geographical coordinates in the lease. The trial court rendered judgment for Towers consistent with its findings.

J & J Systems and the Baughs appealed. They complained of no evidence or insufficient evidence to support the trial court's various findings of fact. The court of appeals agreed with a position asserted in respondents' trial court...

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • Weingarten Realty Investors v. Albertson's, Inc., Civ.A. H-98-0912.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • 24 Septiembre 1999
    ...more than one meaning, taking into consideration the circumstances present when the instrument was executed." Towers of Tex., Inc. v. J & J Sys., Inc., 834 S.W.2d 1, 2 (Tex.1992). In this regard, "[l]anguage should be given its plain grammatical meaning unless it definitely appears that the......
  • ABRAXAS PETROLEUM v. HORNBURG, 08-98-00286-CV
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 16 Marzo 2000
    ...when it is reasonably susceptible to more than one meaning or the meaning is uncertain and doubtful. Towers of Texas, Inc. v. J & J Sys., Inc., 834 S.W.2d 1, 2 (Tex. 1992). Mere disagreement over the interpretation of a contract clause does not render it ambiguous. Hill, 964 S.W.2d at 139; ......
  • Roland v. Flagstar Bank
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas
    • 8 Enero 2014
    ...more than one meaning, taking into consideration thecircumstances present when the instrument was executed." Towers of Tex., Inc. v. J & J Sys., Inc., 834 S.W.2d 1, 2 (Tex. 1992); see U.S. Quest Ltd., 228 F.3d at 404 (citing Childers v. Pumping Sys., Inc., 968 F.2d 565, 569 (5th Cir. 1992))......
  • In Re Cornerstone E & P Company
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Texas
    • 9 Agosto 2010
    ...857, 861 (Tex.2000); Columbia Gas Transmission Corp. v. New Ulm Gas, Ltd., 940 S.W.2d 587, 589 (Tex.1996); Towers of Tex., Inc. v. J & J Sys., Inc., 834 S.W.2d 1, 2 (Tex.1992). If a court finds the language in a deed to be unambiguous, the court may construe the deed as a matter of law. Cor......
  • 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