Hardwick v. Jackson
| Decision Date | 11 July 1958 |
| Docket Number | No. 15451,15451 |
| Citation | 315 S.W.2d 440 |
| Parties | Pleas O. HARDWICK et al., Appellants, v. F. B. JACKSON, Jr., Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
J. B. Sallas, Crockett, for appellants.
J. Howard Lennon, Dallas, for appellee.
Appellant Pleas O. Hardwick and others brought suit against appellee F. B. Jackson, Jr., for damages allegedly arising out of a breach of contract to drill an oil and gas well. The appeal is from a judgment that appellants take nothing.
On July 10, 1954, appellants made two oil and gas leases to appellee Jackson for $12,000, cash bonus ($100 per acre) and an agreement to drill two wells. Jackson paid the $12,000 bonus and drilled one well, which was a dry hole. He did not drill the second well.
In their petition appellants alleged that their damage by reason of the breach was $15,000, the cost of drilling the second well. Appellants introduced evidence showing that the cost of drilling the well would have been $12,900. Appellee filed only a general denial, and offered no evidence at all.
The trial court filed findings of fact and conclusions of law, which included the following finding: 'The evidence does not show that Plaintiffs suffered any recoverable damages and I find that the plaintiffs have not been damaged.'
Appellants present only one point on appeal: 'The Trial Court erred in failing to award appellants damages in the amount of Twelve Thousand Nine Hundred ($12,900.00) Dollars.'
Appellee contends that the point of error is too general to require our consideration because it does not segregate and identify the particular proceedings in the trial court wherein it is contended error was committed. Appellee's position is well taken. Commercial Travelers Casualty Co. v. Perry, Tex.Civ.App., 281 S.W.2d 130 (Syl.1); City of Deer Park v. State ex rel. Shell Oil Co., 154 Tex. 174, 275 S.W.2d 77-85; Novita Oil Company v. Smith, Tex.Civ.App., 247 S.W.2d 151-153; Kendall v. Johnson, Tex.Civ.App., 212 S.W.2d 232-235.
However, lest we be mistaken in the above conclusion, we have examined the record, and have found no reversible error. Appellants did not plead special damages. The measure of damages on which they base their claim in both their pleadings and their evidence is the probable cost of drilling the well. This was formerly accepted in this State as the correct measure of damages in such cases. Texas Pacific Coal & Oil Co. v. Stuard, Tex.Civ.App., 7 S.W.2d 878. But the rule has...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Martin v. Darcy
... ... Hardwick v. Jackson, Tex.Civ.App., ... 315 S.W.2d 440; Guardian Trust Co. v. Brothers, Tex.Civ.App., 59 S.W.2d 343, 345. Such a recovery gives the wronged ... ...
-
Texas Reserve Life Ins. Co. v. Texas Rehabilitation Center of Gonzales Warm Springs Foundation, Inc.
...mean nothing. McWilliams v. Muse, 157 Tex. 109, 300 S.W.2d 643; Alston v. Rhoades, Tex.Civ.App., 316 S.W.2d 182; Hardwick v. Jackson, Tex.Civ.App., 315 S.W.2d 440; Paul v. Johnson, Tex.Civ.App., 314 S.W.2d 338; Miguez v. Miguez, Tex.Civ.App., 221 S.W.2d 293. Nevertheless, we have considered......
-
Fain v. Texas-Hanover Oil Co.
...of defendant's part of the working interest, or that there was any geological difference between the two locations, Hardwick v. Jackson, Tex.Civ.App., Dallas, 315 S.W.2d 440. By its ninth counterpoint appellee asserts that estoppel and waiver were proved as a matter of law. Since the testim......
-
Moore & Moore Drilling Co. v. White
...$31,529.85, plus attorney's fee and interest'. These, and many others are too general to require our consideration. Hardwick v. Jackson, Tex.Civ.App.1958, 315 S.W.2d 440. Also, appellant's points are improperly grouped together and fail to properly refer to the record so as to aid the court......