World Oil Co. v. Hicks, 4085.

• Citation: 46 S.W.2d 394
• Decision Date: 05 February 1932
• Docket Number: No. 4085.,4085.
• Parties: WORLD OIL CO., Inc., v. HICKS.
• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas

46 S.W.2d 394

WORLD OIL CO., Inc., v. HICKS.

No. 4085.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Texarkana.

February 5, 1932.

Rehearing Denied February 11, 1932.

Appeal from District Court, Tarrant County; Frank P. Culver, Jr., Judge.

Suit by L. R. Hicks, Jr., against the World Oil Company, Incorporated, and others. From the judgment for plaintiff, named defendant appeals.

Reversed and remanded.

Samuels, Foster, Brown & McGee and Dean & Perkins, all of Fort Worth, for appellant.

Clay Cooke, W. D. Nicholson, and Mack Taylor, all of Fort Worth, for appellee.

SELLERS, J.

This suit was brought by appellee, L. R. Hicks, Jr., for damages for libel against appellant, World Oil Company, and also against Chester R. Bunker, E. Harriette Bunker, and W. L. Moseley, who are directors of the World Oil Company. Upon a trial before a jury a judgment was rendered in favor of appellee for the sum of $7,500 jointly and severally against the appellant World Oil Company and the defendant Chester R. Bunker, judgment being in favor of the other defendants. From this judgment the appellant World Oil Company has duly prosecuted this appeal, and the disposition made of this appeal will not disturb the judgment against the defendant Chester R. Bunker who did not appeal.

The suit grew out of the writing of a letter by the directors of the World Oil Company to the stockholders of the company. The letter is some fifty pages long, and because of this fact, we will not undertake to copy the letter in full, but we will quote at length from the letter rather than undertake in our own way to give the substance of it.

                            "World Oil Company
                              "Oil Production
                              "World Building
                            "Fort Worth, Texas
                "Chester R. Bunker
                   "President
                "H. E. Granville
                   "Vice-President
                "W. L. Moseley
                   "Treasurer
                "C. R. Lewis
                   "Secretary
                                     "July 24, 1928
                

"To Stockholders, World Oil Company,

"My Dear Stockholder:

"We of the World Oil Company are face to face with an immediate crisis. We are confronted by a problem that will play havoc with our company unless it is promptly handled!

"I never thought I would have to come to you with this bad news. I have been trying to spare you the worry of it because I thought I could handle it myself. Now, however, after employing all my ingenuity and efforts toward handling it, I find conditions are such that I must come to you for aid in coping with this problem and must have the immediate assistance of every World Oil Company stockholder to save our company from ruin. While this may sound very bad to you, yet there is no occasion for you to become shocked or unduly frightened until I acquaint you with the detailed circumstances. * * *

"Several months ago, `a broker' by name of L. R. Hicks, Jr., brought suit against the World Oil Company, claiming that he was due commissions from the sale of stock in our company. He claimed that he had a contract to sell stock for the World Oil Company and was to receive a commission for the sale of this stock. This suit was absolutely without foundation, as our books show very plainly that this man Hicks never at any time made any sales of stock for the World Oil Company or no other broker for that matter. * * *

"I knew Hicks was boosting World Oil in his market letters, but so were other brokers, as it was the leading issue in oil at that time. I could see no harm in this boosting, as what the brokers were saying favorably about World Oil was true. This man Hicks had rented an office in the World Building, which building the World Oil Company had under lease and as the company did not require all of the building for its use, a portion of the third floor was rented to outsiders, one of which was Hicks. It was not long after Hicks started in the brokerage business that he got into financial difficulties, as most brokers do sooner or later, and could not pay the rent of his office in the building which the World Oil Company had under lease. After several months' rent were past due, our treasurer told Mr. Hicks that he would have to pay up his rent or get out. Hicks lost his temper and attacked Mr. Moseley, and a short encounter ensued. The fight soon terminated, however, with neither of the contestants getting much the worse of it, except Hicks, who had a slight abrasion on the side of his face. But Hicks did not make any move to pay his rent to World Oil Company, so he was ordered out of the building and his furniture held for his past due rent. After he was rejected from the building he started slandering and harrassing the World Oil Company in every way he could.

"Finally, he got together with a couple of Fort Worth lawyers and a suit was started against the World Oil Company, claiming $60,000.00 due Hicks on commissions for the sale of stock and this in the face of the fact that Mr. Hicks had never sold for this company one single share of stock. Mr. Hicks executed a document to his lawyers to the effect that he would give them one-half of whatever he got out of the World Oil Company as a fee for their services. This instrument is recorded in this county and shows to what lengths he went against the Company.

"When the suit was filed against us, our attorneys looked over the case and laughed at the impertinence and audacity of Mr. Hicks, realizing, of course, that Hicks had no case against the World Oil Company, and it appeared to them that it was all part of a scheme to hurt the prestige of the company and beat down the market value of World Oil Company stock. The case finally came to trial in the District Court of Fort Worth, and our attorneys advised us to go ahead with the trial, as Hicks had no cause of action, which was evidenced to them for the reason that Hicks' attorneys had tried on several occasions prior to the trial to compromise the matter for a very small amount in comparison with the sum sued for. In fact, Hicks' lawyers tried to compromise the case only a few days before trial, but our attorneys refused any compromise, saying that Hicks had no case and that it would be no trouble for the World Oil Company to win in court.

"We, of course, felt the same way about it, knowing in our hearts that we had made no contract with any broker and that Hicks certainly did not have a contract to sell World Oil Company stock on a commission basis. When Hicks got on the stand under oath, he could not produce a contract. He didn't have a scrap of paper or writing from the World Oil Company to base his suit on. He simply claimed he had a verbal contract, but had no witnesses to this verbal contract. We, ourselves, knowing full well that he had had no verbal contract with any official of the World Oil Company, and if he had, it would not be binding on the company for the reason that the Board of Directors would have to approve such a contract and it would most assuredly have to be in writing. I was not worried; neither were our attorneys. In our opinion and from the looks of the case, we figured we would win hands down. You can, however, imagine our dismay when the jury came out and rendered a verdict in favor of Hicks and a judgment against the World Oil Company, in the amount of $45,000. It is a matter of fact, however, that you cannot tell what a jury will do, because it would seem that in lots of cases they do not go by the evidence, but listen to the lawyers' fantastic pleadings and of course Hicks' lawyer stated to the jury that this big oil company should be made to pay this little man what it owed him, and generally tried to make the jury believe that this big corporation should be stuck for whatever this poor hard-working small broker thought the company owed him. * * *

"We didn't have a chance! We were trapped with our hands tied and, as the motion for a new trial was overruled by the Judge, our attorneys told us we would have to make a bond for double the amount of the judgment and appeal it to the Court of Appeals, our lawyers saying that it would most certainly be reversed and that it was their firm opinion that a decision would be rendered in our favor by the higher courts, for Hicks had not made out a case and the verdict he received was not in accordance with the evidence brought out during the trial. I had not begun to worry, because I believed that I personally could make this appeal bond for the company and I straightway began to try to do this. I have tried every way humanly possible to make this bond. I have sweated over it. I have studied the situation in every way possible, but it is impossible for me to make it personally, because I have my funds all tied up in the company, because of my faith in the company, and it is necessary to put up security as collateral for this bond before the District Court will allow us to appeal our case to the higher courts.

"Also, this security must be put up as collateral for us to lift the liens now on our properties in Texas by reason of this judgment and enable the company to carry on its operations and have clear title to its...