Araiza v. Chapa, 13394
Decision Date | 17 December 1958 |
Docket Number | No. 13394,13394 |
Citation | 319 S.W.2d 742 |
Parties | Rodolfo ARAIZA, Appellant, v. Carlos CHAPA et al., Appellees. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Fansler & Fansler, Victor C. Woods, Laredo, Luther E. Jones, Jr., Corpus Christi, for appellant.
Gordon Gibson, Laredo, for appellees.
This suit was instituted by appellant, Rodolfo Araiza, against Carlos Chapa and his wife, Alicia Ramirez Chapa, appellees, seeking, first, an accounting of an alleged partnership customhouse brokerage business; second, a recovery upon an alleged 'accounts stated' between the alleged partners, and, third, to impose a trust on property allegedly bought by appellee Carlos Chapa with the partnership funds. The trial court granted a summary judgment that appellant take nothing, and hence this appeal.
Appellant contends that the trial court erred in granting the summary judgment as there were triable issues of fact as to the partnership accounting phase of the case.
The summary judgment was based upon the theory that appellant and appellee Chapa had entered into a partnership to operate a customhouse brokerage business in a manner which was in violation of law and Federal regulations and that, therefore, appellant's suit, based upon such illegal partnership, must fail.
Appellee Chapa held a license to operate a customhouse brokerage business, but appellant, Araiza, did not have such a license. The Federal statute providing for customhouse brokers is Title 19, Sec. 1641; the pertinent sub-sections thereof being (a) and (d), reading as follows:
'(d) The Secretary of the Treasury shall prescribe such rules and regulations as he may deem necessary to protect importers and the revenue of the United States, and to carry out the provisions of this section, including rules and regulations requiring the keeping of books, accounts, and records by customhouse brokers and the inspection thereof, and of their papers, documents, and correspondence by, and the furnishing by them of information relating to their business to, any duly accredited agent of the United States.'
We have before us the verified pleadings and depositions of appellant, and there can be no doubt that appellant's cause of action is based upon an alleged partnership existing between appellant and appellee Chapa, and that such partnership was formed in violation of both the Federal statutes and the rules and regulations formulated by the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States. Such a partnership is illegal and void and the courts will not enforce such a contract of partnership but will simply leave the parties where it finds them.
The general rule is stated in 10-A Tex.Jur. Secs. 100, 101 and 102, reading in part as follows:
'Sec. 100. In General.--A contract may be deemed illegal where it is made in violation of the constitution, or of a statute or ordinance, or where its performance will result in such violation, or where it is contrary to public policy, or where a part of the agreement is to use the subject matter of the contract, or a part of it, for an unlawful purpose.
* * *
* * * * * *
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
McJunkin v. McJunkin's Estate
...writ ref'd n.r.e.), which involved a contract in violation of the Texas Anti-Trust laws. See also Araiza v. Chapa, 319 S.W.2d 742, 743 (Tex.Civ.App., San Antonio 1958, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Lusk, 52 S.W.2d 1110 (Tex.Civ.App., Waco 1932, writ ref'd); Jones v. Hanna, 26......
-
Flynn Bros., Inc. v. First Medical Associates, 05-85-00586-CV
...the courts of this state have uniformly held that they will leave the parties where they found them. Araiza v. Chapa, 319 S.W.2d 742, 743 (Tex.Civ.App.--San Antonio 1958, writ ref'd n.r.e.). We shall do the For the reasons above stated, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. It is ord......
-
GNG Gas Systems, Inc. v. Dean
...policy, or the agreement is to use the subject matter, or a part of it, for an unlawful purpose. Araiza v. Chapa, 319 S.W.2d 742, 743 (Tex.Civ.App.--San Antonio 1958, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Conformably, when a corporate officer or director diverts assets of the corporation to his own use, he b......
-
Green v. Meadows
...will not enforce such a contract of partnership but will simply leave the parties where it finds them. Araiza v. Chapa, 319 S.W.2d 742 (Tex.Civ.App.--San Antonio 1958, writ ref. n.r.e.). In so holding we apply the rule that one seeking to invoke the equitable jurisdiction of a court must co......