Roberson v. Robinson

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: ESQUIVEL
• Citation: Roberson v. Robinson, 761 S.W.2d 51 (Tex. App. 1988)
• Decision Date: 19 October 1988
• Docket Number: No. 04-87-00541-CV,04-87-00541-CV
• Parties: Charles E. ROBERSON & Roberson's Funeral Home, Inc., Appellants, v. Raymond ROBINSON, Appellee.

Page 51

761 S.W.2d 51

Charles E. ROBERSON & Roberson's Funeral Home, Inc., Appellants, v. Raymond ROBINSON, Appellee.

No. 04-87-00541-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas San Antonio.

Oct. 19, 1988.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 21, 1988.

Parker Ellzey, Alice, for appellants.

Bernice Y. Shapiro, San Antonio, for appellee.

Before ESQUIVEL, BUTTS and CANTU, JJ.

OPINION

ESQUIVEL, Justice.

This is an appeal in a suit for rents.

On May 1, 1980, Etta Moyer, as lessor, and appellant Charles E. Roberson, as lessee, executed a lease agreement for certain properties situated in Alice, Texas. Under the terms of the lease appellant was to pay a monthly rental sum of $200.00 for a period of two years from May 1, 1980, with an option to buy the property by appellant for a fixed amount and for a period of one year from the date of the death of the lessor if she died during the term of the lease. On December 2, 1980, the lessor died. Appellant Charles E. Roberson attempted to exercise his option which was refused, resulting in lengthy litigation ending in a ruling against appellant by the Supreme Court of Texas. Appellant occupied the property in question from May 1, 1980, through February 15, 1986, conducting thereon a funeral home business known as Charles E. Roberson Funeral Home. On December 12, 1985, appellant formed a corporation known as Roberson's Funeral Home, Inc., with its initial registered office at the same location. During the entire time that the property in question was occupied the lease was not renewed and only $200.00 in rent was paid.

Appellee Raymond Robinson, individually and as Executor of the Estate of Etta Moyer, filed this suit for rents against appellants Charles E. Roberson and Roberson's Funeral Home, Inc.. Appellant Roberson's Funeral Home, Inc. answered by a general denial. Appellant Charles E. Roberson in addition to a general denial set forth affirmative defenses of limitations, estoppel, res judicata and breach of contract. Appellant Charles E. Roberson also answered by way of a cross action for damages and attorney's fees. In a bench trial the trial court found in its judgment that a landlord/tenant relationship existed between the parties from January 1, 1981, through February 15, 1986, and that rental payments were due appellee for that period. The court awarded judgment in favor of appellee and against appellants, jointly and severally, for rents as follows:

Under the terms of the lease agreement of May 1, 1980, accrued and unpaid rent of $200.00 per month from January 1, 1981 through April 30, 1982 in the amount of $3,200.00.

The reasonable rental value of the leasehold from May 1, 1982, through February 15, 1986, in the amount of $63,700.00.

for a total of $66,900.00 as damages, and for attorney's fees in the sum of $4,300.00. Further, the court in its judgment ordered "pre-judgment interest at the highest legal rate from January 1, 1981, until the date of judgment and thereafter at the highest legal rate from the date of judgment until paid," and costs.

Appellants' motion for new trial was overruled by operation of law. This appeal followed. Appellants present us with four points of error on appeal.

In their first point of error appellants allege that the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support a judgment in favor of appellee and against appellant Roberson's Funeral Home, Inc. The point of error is overruled.

Appellants have brought forth a statement of facts but did not request the trial court to make any findings of fact or conclusions of law, and none have been filed with the record in this case. We must therefore presume that the trial judge found every issuable fact proposition necessary to sustain the judgment if such facts were raised by the pleadings and sustained by the evidence. In determining if there is any evidence to support the judgment and implied findings of fact, we can consider only the evidence favorable to the implied findings and disregard any contrary evidence. Chan v. An-Loc Restaurant Inc., 641 S.W.2d 617 (Tex.App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1982, no writ).

Appellee, in his trial pleadings, alleged that appellant Charles E. Roberson formed a corporation which took over all the assets of appellant Charles E. Roberson. It is implied in the court's judgment that the corporation took over all the assets of the funeral home business of appellant Charles E. Roberson, during the period in question. Such finding is supported by the pleadings and the evidence before us. When individuals or...