Order: MUSEUM TOWER, LP vs. AUSTIN BUILDING COMPANY

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                CAUSE NO.       DC—18-02358

MUSEUM TOWER, LP                                      §     IN   THE DISTRICT COURT
                                                      §
            Plaintiff                                 §
                                                      §
V.                                                    §
                                                            162“”   JUDICIAL DISTRICT
                                                      §
AUSTIN BUILDING COMPANY                               §
                                                      §
            Defendant and Third Party Plaintiff       §     DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
                                                      §
V.                                                    §
                                                      §
EGR CONSTRUCTION, INC.                                §
                                                      §
         Third Party Defendant                        §




     ORDER ON DEFENDANT AUSTIN BUILDING COMPANY’S TRADITIONAL AND
       NO-EVIDENCE MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO PLAINTIFF
                          MUSEUM TOWER, L.P.
            CAME 0N FOR HEARING              on the   3rd
                                                            day of September, 2019, Defendant Austin


Building Company‘s (“Austin”) Traditional and No-Evidence Motions for                    Summary Judgment

against Plaintiff       Museum Tower, LP. (“Museum          Tower”).      The Court,    after considering the



Motion, the Response filed by Plaintiff          Museum Tower, and          the Reply filed     by Austin, and

hearing the arguments ofcounsel, finds as follows:


1.    Museum Tower’s         breach of contract cause of action     is   barred by limitations, and a take


      nothing    summary judgment     is   hereby entered    in favor    of Austin as   t0   Museum Tower’s

      breach 0f contract cause of action.


                   Granted


            L/     Denied




ORDER ON AUSTIN MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS T0 MUSEUM TOWER — Page                                 l

4187233_1
2.   Museum Tower           has presented n0 evidence, or less than a scintilla of evidence, ofa breach 0f


     contract by Austin, and a take nothing             summary judgment       is   hereby entered   in favor   of


     Austin as t0        Museum Tower’s    breach of contract cause 0f action.


         ¥          Granted


         L/         Denied


3.   There   is    n0 express warranty from Austin          t0   Museum Tower    covering the kitchen cabinet


     delamination that forms the basis 0f            Museum Tower’s       breach of warranty cause of action,


     and a take nothing summary judgment               is   hereby entered in favor 0f Austin as t0    Museum

     Tower’s breach 0f express warranty cause 0f action.


         g          Granted

         [l         Denied


4.   Museum Tower           has presented n0 evidence, 0r less them a scintilla of evidence, that Austin


     expressly warranted the kitchen cabinets against delamination, and a take nothing                 summary

     judgment       is   hereby entered   in favor   0f Austin as    t0   Museum Tower’s    breach 0f express


     warranty cause 0f action.


         _          Granted


         _/          Denied


5,   There   is,   under Texas law, n0 implied warranty 0f good and workmanlike performance with


     respect t0 commercial,        new    construction, and a take nothing      summary judgment       is   hereby


     entered in favor of Austin as t0       Museum Tower‘s         breach 0f implied warranty cause 0f action.


         \1         Granted


                     Denied




ORDER ON AUSTIN MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO MUSEUM TOWER — Page 2
4187mm
6.   Museum Tower             has presented        r10   evidence, 0r less than a scintilla 0f evidence, that Austin


     breached any implied warranty with respect t0 the kitchen cabinet delamination, and a take


     nothing    summary judgment              is    hereby entered in favor 0f Austin as                t0    Museum Tower’s

     breach 0f implied warranty cause ofaction.


            _/     Granted


                   Denied


7.   Museum Tower has                presented n0 evidence, 0r less than a scintilla of evidence, 0f standing t0


     maintain    its suit     0n behalf 0f units         that   were not owned by    it   at the time    it   filed   suit,   the units


     0n the attached Exhibit “A,” and a take nothing summary judgment                             is   hereby entered        in favor



     0f Austin as    t0 all     ofMuseum Tower‘s                causes of action related t0 such units.


            7      Granted


           \Z      Denied


8.   Museum Tower             has presented n0 evidence, 0r less than a scintilla of evidence, that claims 0f


     the    owners 0f        units   0n the attached Exhibit “A," with the exception 0f Unit 3403,                            are not


     barred by limitations, and a take nothing                        summary judgment      is   hereby entered in favor of


     Austin as t0   all      0f Museum Tower’s causes 0f action related t0 such                   units.



                   Granted

            ‘/     Denied

SIGNED THIS          I


                               day OfSeptember, 201              9.
                         ‘




                                                                           UDGE PRESID            G




ORDER ON AUSTIN MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO MUSEUM TOWER — Page 3
4187283_1