1
... S ee Te x. R. App
. P. 47. 4. 

## CO URT OF A PPEALS SEC OND D I STR I CTOFT E XAS FORT WORTH NO. 2
- 0 8
- 4 9 6
- CV
VI NEYA RD V I L L AG E, L TD. AN D APPE L L AN TS VI NE YARD VI L L AGE, M SV, L L C V
. U N I V EST PRO PERTI ES, I N C
. , A PPELL EES TRU STEE, A N D YO RK SH I RE W E S T R E A L T Y A D V IS O R S , L .P
.

----- ----- --

FR O M THE 67TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- I
. I nt roduc t i on I n t hree i ss ues , A ppe l l ant s V i ney ard Vi l l age , Lt d. an d Vi ney ard Vi l l age M S V , L L C (“V i n e y a rd ” ) c o m p l a i n th a t th e tri a l c o u rt e rre d b y g ra n ti n g s u m m a ry j u d g m e n t f

o r A p p e l l e e s U n i v e st P rop e rt i e s, I n c . a n d Y o rks h i re W e st R e a l ty2
... V i ney ard c l ai m s t hatU ni ves tf i l ed a s i t e p l an l i st i ng Yor ks hi re as t he

ow ner of t he prope r t y at i ss ue i n t hi s ca se , t hereby m ak i ng Yor ks hi re a pa r t y. W e re fe r t o U n i v e s t a n d Y o rk s h i re c o l l e c ti v e l y a s “ U n i v e s t” e x c e p t w h e re i n a p p ro p ri a te . 2 A d v i s o rs , L .P ., 2 by exc l udi ng Vi ney ard’ s su m m ar y j udgm ent evi den ce , an d by a w a rd i n g a tto rn e y s ’ fe e s to U n i v e s t a n d Y o rk s h i re . W e a ffir m .

I I
. Fa ct ual an d Proce dural Bac kground I n 2 0 0 5 , V i n e y a rd e n t e re d i n t o a re a l e s t a t e p u rc h a s e a n d e xch ang e agree m ent(t he “Agree m ent “) w i th U ni ves tt o purcha se prope r t y l oca t ed on H i g h w a y 1 2 1 i n E u l e s s , T e x a s , fo r th e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a re ta i l s h o p p i n g c e n te r. U n d e r th e A g ree m e n t, U n i v e st reta i n e d a n u n d e v e l o p e d p o rt i o n o f t h e p rop e rty near t he hi ghw ay’ s front a g e ro a d. Sect i on 1 0. 04 of t he A greem entrequi red t he part i es t o prepa re a nd e xe c u te a rec i proca l ea se m entan d ope rat i ng a g ree m e n t (th e “R E A ”) to p rov i d e for the sh o p p i n g ce n ter’s la y o u t, const r uct i on, and desi gn gu i del i nes. I n e a r l y 2 0 0 6 , V i n e y a rd a n d U n i v e s tn e g o t i a t e d a n d e x e c u t e d t h e R EA , w hi ch provi ded , i n pe r t i nen tpa r t , for t he fol l ow i ng: 3. Use Re st r i ct i ons . T h e S h o p pi ng Cent er s hal l be used for

ret ai l and/

or rest aurantpur poses . . . . The .

. . V i ney a rd Prope r t i es an d t he U ni ves tPrope r t y, re s pe c t i ve l y, s ha l l b e e nt i t l e d t o no m ore t ha n tw o ( 2) f i nanci al i nst i t ut i ons.3 4 . L a y o u t [a n d C o n s tru c ti o n ] o f th e S h o p p i n g C e n te r. T h e S h o p p in g C e n t e r s h a ll b e c o n s t r u c t e d in su bs t ant i al l y t he m ann er se t fort h on t he Si t e P l an; p ro v id e d , h o w e v e r , e a c h P a r t y s h a ll n o tu n re a s o n a b ly w i th h o l d co n se n t fo r m i n o r rev i sion s to sa m e so a s to ac com m oda t e p ros pec t i ve t ena nt s as i tbe nef i t s t he l ayo utof

t he Shoppi ng Cent er . Thi s sh al l i ncl ude t he pad s i t es f ront i ng on St at e H i ghw ay 121 w hi ch m ay be l ai d outdi f

ferent l y s o l ong a s ea ch pad s i t e c ont ai ns su f f i ci entpa r ki ng for

i t [ s] us e. Addi ti o n al l y, t he Uni ve s tProp e r t y m a y e i t he r c o n t a i n t he fou r

( 4) se p a rate p a d si tes su b sta n ti a l l y as s h o w n o n the S i te Pl an or contai n t hree ( 3) pad si t es so l ong as al l t hree ( 3) bui l di ngs are separat ed by atl eastone hun dred feet (1 0 0 ’). .
. . 5. H ei ght R est r i ct i ons. A l l bui l din g s o n t he U ni vest Prope r t y as w el l as al l
. . . V i ney ard Prope r t i es s hal l be l i m i t ed t o a hei ght of tw enty- four fee t ( 24’ ) i ncl us i ve of p a ra p e ts a n d o th e r a rc h i te c tu ra l fe a tu re s . . . . 6. Scree ni n g . The V i ney ard O w ner s hal l i ns t al l an d p l a n t v e g e ta ti o n s c re e n i n g . . . . 7. Dum ps t er

Enc l os ures . Al l d u m ps t ers sh al l be s u i t a b l y e nc l o s e d s o a s t o s c re e n s a me f ro m v i e w. Th e encl osures shal l use m asonry w al l s w i t h hi nged doo rs t o rem ai n at t ached and functi oni ng atal l t i m es.

. . . A ft er th e e x e cut i on of

t he REA , V i ney ard c ons t r uct ed i t s port i on of t he s h o p p i n g c e n te r. I n 2008, U ni ves tf i l ed a s i t e pl an app l i ca t i on w i t h t he Eul es s Pl ann i ng a nd Zo ni ng C om m i ssi on. The app l i c a tio n contai ned U ni vest ’ s pl ans for t hree pad si t es, i nst ead of

t he four

pad si t es as show n i n t he or i gi nal S i t e Pl an at t ached4

t o t he R EA , w i t h a 16 , 00 0 square foot ret ai l bui l di ng on one of t he si t es. A ft er l e a rn i n g o f th e a p p l i c a ti o n , V i n e y a rd s e n t U n i v e s t a l e tte r i n w h i c h V i n e y a rd com pl ai ned t hatU ni vest ’ s pl anned st r uct ure const i t ut ed a “m at er i al change” a n d d e m a n d e d th a t U n i v e s t c e a s e i ts d e v e l o p m e n t a n d c o m p l y w i th th e te rm s o f t h e R E A. Sho rtl y t herea ft er , V i ney ard f i l ed su i tag ai ns tU ni ves tfor brea ch of c o n tra c t, s e e k i n g , a m o n g o th e r th i n g s , in j u n c ti v e re l i e f to s to p U n i v e s t’s dev el opm ent . I n i t s peti ti o n , V i ney ard a ss ert ed t hatt he t er m s of t he REA re qu i re d Uni ve s t t o bu i l d fou r re s t a ura nt pa d s i t e s a nd t ha t Uni ve s t ’ s p l a n to c re a te o n l y th re e p a d s i te s w i th a re ta i l b u i l d i n g o f a p p ro x i m a te l y 1 6 ,0 0 0 s q u a re fee ton o ne of

t he pad s i t es w as a “m aj or revi si on” t hatrequ i red V i ney ard ’s con se nt . V i ney ard l at er su ppl em ent ed i t s pet i t i on t o as se r t th a t th e R EA con t ai ned am bi guous t er m s. Aft er a h ea r i ng on t he t em porar y i nj unc t i on, t he tr i a l co u rtd e n i e d V i n e y a rd’s re q u e st. O n A p ri l 2 1 , 2 0 0 8 , U n i v e s t fi l e d a tra d i ti o n a l m o ti o n fo r p a rti a l s u m m a ry j u d g m e n t, c l a i m i n g th a t a s a m a tte r o f l a w i ts s i te p l a n d i d n o t v i o l a te th e te rm s o f th e R E A
. S p e c i fi c a l l y , U n i v e s t a rg u e d th a t i t w a s e n ti tl e d to s u m m a ry j udg m entbecause, under r ul es of

cont ractconst r uct i on, t h e R E A al l ow ed U ni ves tt o ( 1) crea t e t hree pa d s i t es i ns t ea d of four , ( 2) us e t he pad s i t es for ret ai l , and ( 3) bui l d a 16 , 00 0 squ are foot bui l di ng on one of t he pad si t es.5

I n res pons e, V i ney ard a ss ert ed t hat l ang uag e i n se ct i on four of t he REA i s am bi guous an d t herefore rai se s a g enu i ne i ss ue of m at er i al fac t . Spec i f i ca l l y, V i ney ard c l ai m ed t hatt he REA i s si l ent as t o ( 1) w hatco ns t i t ut es a “m aj or ” or a “m i nor ” revi si on for consent pur poses, ( 2) w hen i tw oul d be “unreasonabl e” t o w i t hho l d consent for a “m i nor ” revi si on, and ( 3) under w hatci rcum st ances con se ntco ul d be w i t hhe l d for a “m aj or ” revi si on. Vi ney ard’ s res pons e i ncl ude d, am ong ot her t hi ngs, an af f i davi tand t he depo si t i on t est i m ony o f Bu r k C ol l i ns, a V i n e y a rd re p re s e n ta ti v e . C o l l i n s te s ti fi e d a s to h i s i n te rp re ta ti o n o f th e te rm s al l eged by V i neyard t o be am bi guo us. U ni vestf i l ed obj ect i ons t o V i neyard’ s sum m ar y j udg m entevi dence, as se r t i ng t hatV i ney ard s oughtt o i m prope r l y us e p arol ev i den ce i n a n a t t em pt t o creat e a facti ssue. Fur t her , U ni vestcl ai m ed t hatC ol l i ns’ s af f i davi tw as v a g u e , a m b i g u o u s, co n c l u so ry, an d i n c l u d e d sta tem e n ts b y an i n tere ste d p a rty t hatw ere notreadi l y controver t i bl e. A ft er a hea r i ng on U n i v es t ’ s part i al m ot i on for s um m ar

y j udgm ent , t he t r i al c o u r tgrant ed j udgm enti n favo r of U ni ves tan d s us t ai ned s eve ral of U n i v e s t’s e v i d e n ti a ry o bj e c ti o n s . T h e tri a l c o u rt s u b s e q u e n tl y g ra n te d U n i v e s t’s m ot i on for

at t or ne y s ’ fe e s and t hen si gned a f i nal j udg m ent , r ul i ng t hat U ni ves t ’ s pl ann ed st r uct ure com pl i ed w i t h t he t er m s of t he REA as a m at t er of6

l aw and aw ardi ng t o U ni vestand Y or kshi re “ n e c essar y and reasonabl e” at t or ney s’ fee s and co st s. Thi s app ea l fol l ow ed.

I I I
. Pa r t i al M ot i on for Sum m ar

y Ju dgm ent I n i t s f i rsti ss ue, V i ney ard a rgue s t hat t he t r i al co urter red by d et er m i ni ng t hatU ni vest ’ s pl anned st r uct u re c om pl i ed w i t h t he t er m s of t he R EA as a m at t er of l aw because V i neyard’ s sum m ar y j udg m ent evi dence creat ed m at er i al fa c ti s s u e s wi t h re g a rd t o s e v e ra l e s s e n t i a l t e r ms i n t h e R E A. A
. St andard of

Rev i ew I n a su m m ar

y j udgm ent ca se , t he i ss ue on a ppe al i s w het her t he m ova nt m ett he su m m ar

y j udgm entburden by es t abl i s h i n g t hatno g enu i ne i ss ue of m at er i al fac tex i st s and t hatt he m ova nti s ent i t l ed t o j udgm entas a m at t er of l a w . T e x . R
. C i v . P . 1 6 6 a (c ); S w . E l e c . P o w e r C o . v . G ra n t, 73 S. W
. 3d 211, 2 1 5 (T e x . 2 0 0 2 ); C i t y of H ous t on v. C l ea r C ree k Bas i n Aut h. , 589 S. W
. 2d 671, 678 ( Tex. 1979 )
. The burden of proof i s on t he m ova nt , and al l doubt s abo ut t he exi st enc e o f

a gen ui ne i ss ue of m at er i al f

ac tare res ol v ed aga i ns tt he m o v a n t. S w . E l e c . P o w e r C o ., 73 S. W
. 3d a t215. W hen re v i e wi n g a s u mm a r y j u d g me n t , we t a k e a s t r u e a l l e vi dence favo rabl e t o t he nonm ova nt , an d w e i ndul ge eve r y re a s o n a b l e i nferenc e a nd re s o l v e a n y d o u b ts in t h e n o n m o v a n t’s fa v o r. V al enc e Operat i ng Co. v. D o rse tt , 1 6 4 S .W .3 d 6 5 6 , 6 6 1 (T e x . 2 0 0 5 ). E v i d e n c e th a t fa v o rs th e m o v a n t’s7

p o s i ti o n w i l l n o t b e c o n s i d e re d u n l e s s i t i s u n c o n tro v e rte d
. G rea tA m . Res er ve I ns . C o. v. San A nt oni o Pl um bi ng Suppl y Co. , 3 9 1 S .W .2 d 4 1 , 4 7 (T e x . 1 9 6 5 ). B u tw e m u s t c o n s id e r w h e t h e r re a s o n a b le a n d fa ir -m in d e d ju ro rs c o u ld d if fe r in th e i r c o n c l u s i o n s i n l i g h t o f a l l o f th e e v i d e n c e p re s e n te d
. S ee W al
- M ar tStores, I nc. v. Sp at es , 1 8 6 S .W .3 d 5 6 6 , 5 6 8 (T e x . 2 0 0 6 ); C i t y of Kel l er v. W i l so n , 168 S .W .3 d 8 0 2 , 8 2 2
– 2 4 (T e x . 2 0 0 5 ). B. Di sc us si on T h e p r in c ip a l d is p u t e b e tw e e n t h e p a r t ie s is w h e t h e r t h e f irs ts e n t e n c e in s e c ti o n fo u r o f th e R E A (th e “ c o n s e n t p ro v i s i o n ” ) i s a p p l i c a b l e to U n i v e s t’s p l a n s to c re a te th re e p a d s i te s a n d to b u i l d a 1 6 ,0 0 0 s q u a re fo o t re ta i l s tru c tu re on on e o f

t he pad s i t es . Sec t i on four s t at es , i n pe r t i nen tpa r t , t he fol l ow i ng: (4 ) L a y o u t [a n d C o n s tru c ti o n ] o f th e S h o p p i n g C e n te r. T h e S h o p p in g C e n t e r s h a ll b e c o n s t r u c t e d in su bs t ant i al l y t he m ann er s etfort h on t he S i t e Pl an; p ro v id e d , h o w e v e r , e a c h P a r t y s h a ll n o tu n re a s o n a b ly w i th h o l d co n se n t fo r m i nor revi si ons to sa m e so as to ac com m oda t e p ros pec t i ve t ena nt s as i t ben ef i t s t he l ayo utof

t he Shoppi ng Cent er . Thi s sh al l i ncl u de t he pad si t es f ront i ng on St at e H i ghw ay 121 w hi ch m ay be l ai d outdi f

ferent l y s o l ong a s ea ch pad s i t e c ont ai ns su f f i ci entpa r ki ng for

i t [ s] us e. A d d i t i ona l l y, t he Uni ve s tProp e r t y m a y e i t he r c on t a i n t he fo u r

( 4) separa t e pad si t es su b sta n ti a l l y as sh o w n o n the S i te Pl an or contai n t hree ( 3) pad si t es so l ong as al l t hree ( 3) bui l di ngs are separat ed by atl eastone hun dred feet (1 0 0 ’). .
. . [E m p h a s i s a d d e d .]8

V i ney ard a rgue s t hat“ se veral rea so nab l e i nt er pret at i ons exi stas t o w hen , a n d h o w , a p a rty m a y ch a n g e th e sh o p p i n g c e n ter l a y o u t de p i c ted i n the S i te P la n ” a n d t h a tt h e t e r m s “ m in o r re v is io n s ” a n d “ u n re a s o n a b ly w it h h o ld con se nt ” i n s ec t i on four of t he REA are su sc ept i bl e t o m ore t han one m ea ni ng. V i ney ard c l ai m s t hat bec aus e t here i s m ore t han one rea so nab l e i nt er pret at i on fo r t h e s e t e r m s , fa c t is s u e s e x is ta s t o w h e t h e r U n iv e s t ’s p la n n e d s t r u c t u re is a “ m i n o r re v i s i o n ” a n d w h e th e r V i n e y a rd “ u n re a s o n a b l y w i th h [e ]l d c o n s e n t.” V i neyard’ s argum ent s reston i t s cl ai m t hatU ni vest ’ s pl an n e d s tr uct ure i s a re v i si on rega rdl es s of w het her

i ti s a “ m i nor

revi si on” or

a “m aj or

revi s i o n .” U ni vest , on t he ot her hand, argues t hatbe c ause i t s pl ans are i n com pl i ance w i t h t he REA
— and t herefore d o notco ns t i t ut e a revi si on— V i ney ard’ s con se nt i s notrequ i red. Uni ves tfurt her as se r t s t hatV i ney a rd ’s i n t er pret at i on of t he con se ntprovi si on i s unrea so nab l e bec aus e i t rend ers exp res s provi si ons i n t he R E A m e a n i n g l e ss . W e ag ree w i th U n i v e st. W h e n c o n s t r u in g a w r it t e n c o n t ra c t , o u r p r im a r y c o n c e r n is t o a s c e r t a in th e tru e i n te n t o f th e p a rti e s a s e x p re s s e d i n th e i n s tru m e n t. N P A nde rso n C o t t on Ex ch. , L. P. v. Pott er , 230 S. W
. 3d 457, 463 (Te x. App
. — Fo r tW o rt h 2 0 0 7 , n o p e t.); see al so Rep ubl i c N at ’ l Ban k of D al l as v. N at ’ l Ban kers Li fe I ns. C o. , 4 2 7 S .W .2 d 7 6 , 7 9
– 8 0 (T e x . C i v . A p p .— D a l l a s 1 9 6 8 , w ri t re f’d n .r.e .) ( noti ng t hatcour t s shoul d not consi der t he “i nt ent i on w hi ch t he par t i es m ay9

have had, but fai l ed t o express i n t he i nst r um ent ”)
. I n doi ng s o , w e m u st exa m i ne and co ns i der t he ent i re c ontra c ti n a n e f fortt o ha r m oni z e a nd gi ve e ffe c t t o a l l p ro v i s i o n s s o th a t n o n e a re re n d e re d m e a n i n g l e s s . Pott er , 230 S
. W
. 3 d a t 4 6 3 ; see J. M
. D avi dson, I nc. v. W ebst er , 128 S. W
. 3d 223, 229 (Tex. 200 3)
. C ont rac t ual provi si ons s houl d be co ns i dered w i t h referenc e t o t he e n ti re i n s tru m e n t; n o s i n g l e p ro v i s i o n s h o u l d c o n tro l
. W ebst er , 12 8 S
. W
. 3d at 2 2 9 ; Pott er , 2 3 0 S
. W
. 3 d a t4 6 3
. W ords i n a co ntrac tm us tcarr y th e ir ordi nar y, ge neral l y ac ce pt ed m ea ni ng unl es s t he con t rac t i t se l f s how s t hatt he te rm s h a v e b e e n u s e d i n a te c h n i c a l o r d i ffe re n t s e n s e . See Ra m sa y v. M d. A m . G e n. I ns . Co. , 533 S
. W
. 2d 344, 346 (Tex. 1976 )
. I n c ons t r ui ng a c o n tra c t, w e m a y n o t re w ri te i t n o r a d d to i ts l a n g u a g e . A m . M f rs. M ut . I ns. C o. v. Sch aefer , 12 4 S
. W
. 3d 15 4, 16 2 (Tex
. 20 03 )
. A l so, w e m ustw ei gh t hat p a rt i e s to a c o n tra c t a re c o n side red m a ste rs o f th e i r ow n ch o i c e s. T h e y are en ti tl e d to s e l e c t w h a t te rm s a n d p ro v i s i o n s to i n c l u d e i n a c o n tra c t b e fo re exe cut i ng i t . And, i n s o cho os i ng, ea ch i s ent i t l ed t o rel y upon t he w ords sel ect ed t o dem arcat e t hei r respect i ve obl i gat i ons and r i ghts
. I n shor t , t he par t i es st r i ke t he deal t hey choo se t o st r i ke and, t hus, vol untar i l y bi nd t hem sel ves i n t he m anner t hey cho ose. C ros s Ti m bers O i l Co. v. Exx on Cor p. , 2 2 S .W .3 d 2 4 , 2 6 (T e x . A p p .— A m a r illo 2 0 0 0 , n o p e t.).10

A c o n t ra c tis u n a m b ig u o u s if it c a n b e g iv e n a d e f in it e le g a l m e a n in g ; if i t i s su bj ec t t o tw o or m ore rea so nab l e i nt er pret at i ons , i ti s am bi guous , crea t i ng a fa c t i s s u e o n th e p a rti e s ’ in te n t. W ebst er , 1 2 8 S .W .3 d a t 2 2 9 ; Lop ez v. M unoz , H ock em a & R ee d, L. L. P. , 22 S. W
. 3d 857 , 861 (Tex. 2000 )
. L ac k o f cl ar i t y, how ever , does notnecessar i l y creat e an am bi gui t y, and nei t her does a m e re d i s a g re e m e n t b e tw e e n th e p a rti e s . See Uni versa l H ea l t h Ser vs . , I nc. v. R e n a i s s a n c e W o me n ' s Gro u p , P
. A. , 121 S
. W
. 3d 742 , 746 (Tex. 2003 ) (add i ng t hatw het her

“ a c o n tra c t i s am bi guous i s a q ues t i on of l aw t hatm us tbe deci ded b y e x a m in ing t he contractas a w hol e i n l i ght of t he ci rcum st ances p re s e n t w h e n th e c o n tra c t w a s e n te re d ” ); s e e a l s o Ci t y o f T h e Co l on y v . N. T e x . M u n . W a ter D i st. , 272 S. W
. 3d 699, 722 (Te x. App
. — Fo r tW ort h 2008, p e t. fi l e d ) (e x p l a i n i n g th a t w h e n “ th e m e a n i n g o f a c o n tra c t i s u n a m b i g u o u s , a p a rty ’s c o n s tru c ti o n i s i m m a te ri a l ” ). W hen a con t rac tco nt ai ns an am bi gui t y, t he grant i ng of a m ot i on for su m m ar y j udgm enti s i m prope r be ca us e t he i nt er pret at i on of t he i ns t r um ent b e c o m e s a fa c t i s s u e . C oker v. C oker , 6 5 0 S .W .2 d 3 9 1 , 3 9 4 (T e x . 1 9 8 3 ). C onvers el y, t he i nt er pret at i on o f a n unam bi guo us cont racti s a m at t er of l aw to b e d e te rm i n e d b y th e tri a l c o u rt. G ul f I ns. C o. v. Bu r ns M ot ors, I nc. , 22 S .W .3 d 4 1 7 , 4 2 3 (T e x . 2 0 0 0 ).3
... T h e d i c ti o n a ry i n d e fi n i n g th e c o m m o n l y u s e d te rm “ p a d s i te ,”

how eve r , doe s notm ent i on s i z e, buti ns t ea d de f i nes “p ad si t e” as “ a b ui l di ng l o t a v a i l a b l e fo r re ta i l d e v e l o p m e n t, a s n e x t to a s h o p p i n g m a l l o r c e n te r.” D i c t i on a r

y. c om , “ pa d s i t e , ” h t t p: / / di c t i on a r

y. re fe re nc e . c om /

brow s e /

pa d+ s i te (l a s t v i s i te d S e p t. 3 0 , 2 0 0 9 ).

4
... Col l i ns t e s t i f i e d t ha t “ pa d s i t e ” i s a t e r m of a r t i n t he rea l es tate d e v e lo p m e n tin d u s t r y t h a tre fe rs t o a re s t a u ra n to r a re t a il b u ild in g t h a tis 11 S ect i on four

of t he R EA provi des th a t “ . . . t he U ni vestProper t y m ay e i th e r co n tai n the fou r ( 4 ) se p a rate p a d sit e s su b sta n ti a l l y a s s h o w n o n the S i te P l a n o r c o n ta i n th re e (3 ) p a d s i te s s o l o n g a s a l l th re e (3 ) b u i l d i n g s a re se parat ed by a tl ea stone hu n d re d fee t( 100 ’ )
. ” Sect i on t hree of t he REA provi des t hat“ [ t ] he Shoppi ng Cent er sh al l be us ed for ret ai l an d/

or res t aurant pur pos es . . . an d t he U ni ves tPrope r t y, res pec t i vel y, s hal l be en ti tl e d t o no m o re th a n tw o ( 2 ) fi n a n c i a l i n sti tu ti o n s.” T h u s, the R E A all o w s U n i v e st to creat e t hree pad si t es and desi gnate i t s pad si t es for ret ai l use. N ei t her t he A greem en t nor t he R EA , how ever , def i nes t he t er m “pad si t e. ” V i neyard, t herefore, suggest s t hatt he t er m i s am bi guo us and argues t hat “[ w ] het her

U ni vesthad t he r i ght t o al t er t he l ayout depi ct ed i n t he S i t e Pl an t ur ned on w het her

i ts oughtt o bui l d a ‘ pad s i t e, ’ w hi ch i s a rea l es t at e t er m of a rt d e n o ti n g a s p e c i fi c s i z e .” 3 I n s upportof i t s argum ent , V i ney ard c i t es t o t he dep os i t i on t es t i m ony of C ol l i ns , i n w hi ch C ol l i ns provi des hi s i nt er pret at i on of th e te rm “ p a d s i te .” 4 Such parol evi den ce , how eve r , i s notad m i ss i bl e f or t heany w here from 2, 500 s qua re f ee tup to 9 ,0 00 squa re f ee t . The Si t e Pl an, how ever , depi ct s tw o of V i neyard’ s ow n “pad si t es” al ong H i ghw ay 12 1 w hi ch con t ai n ret ai l bui l di ngs t hatare o ver 9, 000 s qua re fee t . Fu r t her m ore, Col l i ns t est i f i ed at one poi nt t hat i t w as not t he si ze of t he bui l di ng V i neyard obj ect ed t o but i t s w i dt h and t hat U ni vest coul d have a 16 , 00 0 square foot bui l di ng so l ong a s t he bui l di ng w as l ai d outa ce r t ai n w ay. 12 p u r p o s e o f c re a ti n g a n a m b i g u i ty . S ee D avi d J. Sacks, P. C
. v. H aden , 266 S. W
. 3d 447, 450 (Tex. 2008 ) (st at i ng t hatan una m bi guous c o n tra c t w i l l be enf orce d a s w r i t t en, an d pa rol ev i den ce w i l l not be rec ei ved for t he pur pos e o f c re a ting an am bi gui t y or t o gi ve t he contracta m eani ng di f ferentf rom t hat
w h i c h i ts l a n g u a g e i m p a rts ). T h e S it e P l a n atta c h e d to th e R E A d e p i c ts th e o v e ral l l a y o u t of b o th V i n e y a rd’s a n d U n i v e st’s p rop e rt i e s. T h e p o rt i o n o f t h e S i te P l a n p e rt a i n i n g to Uni ve s t ’ s p rop e r t y s ho w s fou r “ pa d s i t e s ” t ha ta re e a c h a pp rox i m a t e l y 5, 000 sq uare f

ee t . Sec t i on four

of t he REA al l ow s U ni ves tt o a l t er t he Si t e P l a n by creat i ng t hree “pad si t es. ” The S i t e Pl an does not, how ever , depi cthow t hose t hre e “p ad si t es ” sh oul d l ook i n s i z e o r s hap e. Fu r t her m ore, ne i t her t he A greem entnor

t he R EA st at e rest r i ct i ons as t o t he si z e o r s h a p e of t he “pad s i te s .”Th e A greem entand t he R EA do, how ever , expressl y st at e rest r i ct i ons as to sp a c in g , p a r k i n g , d u m p ste rs, an d h e i g h t. I f i t ha d b e e n V i n e y a rd’s i n ten t, th e re fo re , to re s tri c t th e s i z e a n d s h a p e o f U n i v e s t’s “ p a d s i te s ,” th e n V i n e y a rd13

coul d have exp ressl y i ncl uded such a provi si on i n t he A greem entor t he R EA as i tdi d for sp ac i ng, par ki ng, dum ps t ers, an d he i ght
. How eve r , i tdi d notdo s o. Th e o n l y re s t r i c t i o n s e x p re s s l y p ro v i d e d p e r t a i n i n g t o “ p a d s i t e s ” s t a t e t hat “p ad si t es ” m us tbe atl ea stone hund red fee tap artan d “ m ay be l ai d out d i ffe re n tl y s o l o n g a s e a c h p a d s i te c o n ta i n s s u fficie n t p a rk i n g fo r i t[s ] u s e .” Th us, based on t he pl ai n l angu age of t he a g re e m ent , t he R EA al l ow ed U ni ves t t o crea t e t hree pa d s i t es , us e i t s prope r t y for ret ai l , an d a l t er

t he l ayo ut and si ze of

i t s pad si t es f rom t he or i gi nal S i t e Pl an; t herefore, U ni vest ’ s pl anned st r uct ure i s i n com pl i anc e w i t h t he REA
. I f w e w ere t o i nt er prett he agree m ent a s V i n e y a rd a sk s u s to , a n d req u i re U n i v e st to se e k V i n e y a rd’s c o n se n t fo r i ts pl ann ed st r uct ure, t hen w e w oul d be rend er i ng e xpres s provi si ons i n s ec t i ons th ree an d fou r of the R E A m e a n i n g l e ss — sp e c i fi c a l l y , U n i v e st’s ri g h t to cre a te t hree pa d s i t es , al t er t he l ayo utof

t he or i gi nal Si t e Pl an, an d us e i t s sp ac e f or re t a il. In o rd e r

t o p re v e n tre n d e r in g p o r t io n s o f t h e R E A m e a n in g le s s , t h e o n ly reasonabl e i nt er pret at i on for t he consent provi si on i s t hatt he par t i es i nt ended for co ns e n t to b e s oughtw hen a part y revi ses ex pres s provi si ons i n t he REA and not w hen a part y i s i n com pl i ance w i th th e R E A
. S ee C oker , 650 S. W
. 2d a t3 9 3 . W e c o n c lu d e , t h e re fo re , t h a tU n iv e s t ’s p la n n e d s t r u c t u r e i s in c o m p l i a n c e w i th th e R E A a s a m a tte r o f l a w a n d th a t th e tri a l c o u rt d i d n o t e rr5
... Bot h Uni ves tan d Yor ks hi re f i l ed a m ot i on for at t or ney s’ fee s unde r t he R E A , w h i c h e x p re s s l y p ro v i d e d fo r a tto rn e y s ’ fe e s , a n d u n d e r th e D e c l a ra to ry J u d g m e n t A c t. 14 i n g ra n ti n g U n i v e s t’s p a rti a l m o ti o n fo r s u m m a ry j u d g m e n t . A c c o rd i n g l y , w e over r ul e V i neyard’ s f i rsti ssue. I V
. Ext r i nsi c Evi dence I n i t s s e c o n d i s s u e , V i n e y a rd a rg u e s t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r ed by su st ai ni ng Uni ves t ’ s gen eral obj ec t i on t o t he pur port ed parol e vi den ce t es t i m ony o f C o l l i n s a n d b y e x c l u d i n g p o rti o n s o f C o l l i n s ’s a ffid a v i t b e c a u s e C o l l i n s ’s t e st i m ony m ett he adm i ss i bi l i t y requ i rem ent s unde r t he r ul es of

ev i den ce an d com m on l aw . How eve r , be ca us e w e hav e con cl ude d t hatt he t er m s i n t he REA a re n o t a m b i g u o u s , w e m u s t o v e rru l e V i n e y a rd ’s e v i d e n ti a ry i s s u e s . See Fi ess v. St at e F ar m Ll oyds , 2 0 2 S .W .3 d 7 4 4 , 7 4 7 (T e x . 2 0 0 6 ) ( re c o g n iz in g t h a tif t he agreem enti s notam bi guo us, cour t s do notconsi der ext r i nsi c evi dence
w hen i nt er pret i ng t he agree m ent)
. Accordi ngl y, w e ove r r ul e V i ney ard’ s se con d i ssue. V
. A t t or neys’ Fees I n i t s t hi rd a nd f i nal i ss u e , V i n eya rd c l ai m s t hatt he t r i al co urter red by aw ardi ng at t or neys’ fees t o U ni vestand Y or kshi re. 5 A
. St andard of

Rev i ew15

W hen a st at ut e st at es t hata t r i al cour t“m ay” aw ard at t or ney’ s fees, s u c h a n a w a rd i s re v i e w a b l e fo r a n a b u s e o f d i s c re ti o n . Sm i t h v. M cCart hy , 1 9 5 S .W .3 d 3 0 1 , 3 0 4 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 6 , p e t. d e n i e d ); see Tex. C i v. Prac . & Rem
. Code Ann. § 37. 009 ( V er non 2008) ( “I n a ny p roce edi ng u n d e r th i s c h a p te r, th e c o u rt m a y a w a rd c o s ts a n d re a s o n a b l e a n d n e c e s s a ry a tto rn e y ’s fe e s a s a re e q u i ta b l e a n d j u s t.” ). A n a w a rd o f re a s o n a b l e a tto rn e y ’s fee s i s m and at or

y un der s ec t i on 38. 001 of t he ci vi l prac t i ce an d rem edi es co de i f t here i s proof of

t he reasonabl eness of t he fees, butt he a m o u n t o f th e a w a rd l i es w i t hi n t he t r i al co urt ’ s di sc ret i on. U l i co C as. C o. v. A l l i ed Pilo ts A ssoc. , 1 8 7 S .W .3 d 9 1 , 1 0 9
– 1 0 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 5 , n o p e t.) ( “ A tri a l c o u rt has di sc ret i on i n f i xi ng t he am ountof at t or ney ’ s fee s, buti tha s no di sc ret i on to e n ti re l y d e n y a tto rn e y ’s fe e s e s ta b l i s h e d u n d e r s e c ti o n 3 8 .0 0 1 .” ), rev’ d on ot her grounds , 2 6 2 S .W .3 d 7 7 3 (T e x . 2 0 0 8 ). To det er m i ne w het her a t r i al co urtab us ed i t s di sc ret i on, w e m us tde ci de
w het her

t he t r i al c o u rt a c t ed w i t houtreferenc e t o a ny g ui di ng r ul es or pr i nci pl e s ; i n o t her

w ords , w e m us tde ci de w het her t he ac tw as ar bi t rar y or u n re a s o n a b l e . C i re v . Cum m i ngs , 1 3 4 S .W .3 d 8 3 5 , 8 3 8
– 3 9 (T e x . 2 0 0 4 ). W e canno tconclu d e th a t a t r i al cour tabused i t s di scret i on m erel y because w e w o u l d h a v e ru l e d d i ffe re n tl y i n th e s a m e c i rc u m s ta n c e s . E. I
. du Po ntde N em ours & Co. v. Robi ns on , 9 2 3 S .W .2 d 5 4 9 , 5 5 8 (T e x . 1 9 9 5 ).16

B. Di sc us si on V i ney ard c l ai m s t hatbe ca us e t he t r i al cou r tdi d notf i nd t hatan aw ard of at t or ney s’ fee s t o U n i v e s t and Yor ks hi re w as “ equ i t abl e a nd j us t , ” t hen an y s u c h a w a rd p re d i c a te d o n th e D e c l a ra to ry J u d g m e n t A c t (“ D J A ” ) i s i m p ro p e r. W e di sagree. W h e n a n a b u s e -o f-d i s c re ti o n s ta n d a rd o f re v i e w a p p l i e s to a tri a l c o u rt’s ruli n g , fi n d i n g s o f fac t a n d c o n c l u sion s o f l a w a re n o t req u i red u n l e ss a s tatu te o r ru l e s p e c i fi c a l l y s ta te s o th e rw i s e . S ee I n re M
. J
. G. , 248 S. W
. 3d 753, 761 (T e x . A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 8 , n o p e t.); D avi s v. Sp r i ng B ranch M ed. C t r . , I nc. , 1 7 1 S .W .3 d 4 0 0 , 4 1 3 (T e x . A p p .— H o u s to n [1 4 th D i s t.] 2 0 0 5 , n o p e t.). Therefore, be ca us e w e revi ew t he aw ard for at t or ney s’ fee s unde r t he D JA for an abu se of

di sc ret i on, an d b e c a u s e t he D JA i s si l enton fi ndi ngs of fac tan d con cl us i ons of

l aw , w e h o l d t hatt he t r i al co urtw as notrequ i red t o i ss ue e x p res s fi n d i n g s a n d co n c l u sion s i n rel a ti o n to th e a w a rd o f atto rne y s’ fee s to U n i v e s t a n d Y o rk s h i re . S ee T e x . C i v . P ra c . & R e m . C o d e A n n . § 3 7 .0 0 9 ; see al so Ben chm ar k I ns. C o. v. Su l l i van , No. 12- 07- 00223
- CV , 2009 W L 1153 385, at * 4 (T e x . Ap p . — T y l e r Ap r . 3 0 , 2 0 0 9 , n o p e t . ) ( me m. o p . ) ( i mp l yi ng t hat express fin d in g s o f factand concl usi ons of l aw are unnecessary w hen a t r i al cour taw ards at t or neys’ fees under t he T exas Lab o r

C ode)
. Fur t her m ore, w here, as he re , no f i ndi ngs of fac tan d c onc l us i ons of l aw are requ es t ed or6
... W e n ot e t hati n i t s repl y br i ef, V i n e y a rd pres ent s an al t er nat i ve

argum enton w hy t he t r i al cour thad t o m ake a f i ndi ng as t o t he at t or neys’ fees be i ng “ e qu i t a bl e a nd j us t . ” Spe c i f i c a l l y, Vi ne ya rd re fe re nc e s a r ul e 11 agreem enti n w hi ch t he par t i es agreed t hat t he t r i al cour thad t o m ake fact ual f i ndi ngs t o r ul e o n t he m ot i on for at t or ney s’ fee s. Vi ney ard, how eve r , ci t es no a u t h o r it y t o s u p p o r tit s a rg u m e n t . T h e re fo re , t h e a rg u m e n tis in a d e q u a t e ly b ri e fe d a n d p re s e n ts n o th i n g fo r o u r re v i e w . S ee T e x . R . A p p . P . 3 8 .8 (h ). 17 fi l e d , w e i m p l y a l l n e c e s s a ry fi n d i n g s a n d c o n c l u s i o n s to s u p p o rt th e tri a l c o u rt’s j u d g m e n t. S ee S i xt h R M A Par t ners, L. P. v. Si bl ey , 111 S. W
. 3d 46, 52 (Tex. 200 3)
. Thus , w e pres um e t hat t he t r i al co urti m pl i edl y found t hatan aw ard of a tto rn e y s ’ fe e s to U n i v e s t a n d Y o rk s h i re w a s “ e q u i ta b l e a n d j u s t.” 6 V i neyard, how ever , al so cl ai m s t hat t he t r i al cour t i m proper l y a w a rd ed con t rac t ual at t or ney ’ s fee s unde r t he REA t o Yor ks hi re, a n on- part y t o t he agree m ent . Yor ks hi re, on t he ot her ha nd, p o i n t s outt hati tf i l ed a c l ai m for a tto rn e y ’s fe e s u n d e r th e R E A a n d u n d e r th e D J A ; th e re fo re , th e tri a l c o u rt’s a wa rd o f

a t t o r n e y ’ s fe e s c o u l d b e s u p p o r t e d b y i t s c l a i m p u rs u a n tt o t h e DJ A. W e ag ree . B e c a u se w e p res u m e the tr i a l co u r t a w a r d e d atto rne y ’s fee s to Y or kshi re based on i t s cl ai m fo r decl arat ory rel i ef , w e need not address V i n e y a rd ’s a rg u m e n t p e rta i n i n g to a tto rn e y ’s fe e s u n d e r th e R E A
. S e e W o rfo rd
v. Stam per , 80 1 S
. W
. 2d 10 8, 10 9 (Tex
. 19 90 ) (st at i ng t hata j udg m entm ust be af f i r m ed i f

i tca n be uphe l d on any l ega l t heo r y t hatf i n d s s u p p orti n t he e v i d e n c e ); s e e a l s o F o rte n b e rry v . C a v a n a u g h , No. 03- 07- 00310
- CV , 2008 W L18

4 9 9 7 5 6 8 , a t * 1 0 (T e x . A p p .— A u s ti n N o v . 2 6 , 2 0 0 8 , p e t. d e n i e d ) (m e m . o p .) ( pres um i ng t hatt he t r i al co urtaw arded ap pel l ee at t or ne y ’ s fee s bas ed on appel l ee’ s cl ai m for

decl arat ory rel i e f, and decl i ni ng t o address any addi t i onal groun ds for

at t or ney’ s fees)
. A ccordi ngl y, w e over r ul e V i neyard’ s t hi rd i ssue.

V I
. Concl us i on H a v i n g o v e rru l e d a l l th re e o f V i n e y a rd ’s i s s u e s , w e a ffir m th e tri a l c o u rt’s j u d g m e n t.
B OB M CC OY J U S T I C E
PA N EL: CA YC E, C. J. ; M C C O Y and M EI ER, JJ. DEL I VERE D: Oct ob e r 1, 2009