Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determin ed that thi s opinio n should not * be publishe d an d is not precede nt except und er the limit ed circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 10349 Su m m ar y Cal endar

P R IM E IN C O M E A S S E T M A N A G E M E N T IN C , P l a i n ti ff

- A p p ell a n t v. O N E D A L L A S C E N T R E A S S O C IA T E S L P , D efen da n t- A pp el l ee

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e N ort h ern D i st ri ctof T exas 3: 07- C V

- 1731

B e fo r e G A R Z A , C L E M E N T , a n d O W E N , C ir c u it J u d g e s . P E R C U R I A M: * A f t e rfa i l i n gt o c o n s u mma t e a c o mme r c i a l r e a l e s t a t e t r a n s a c t i o n , P r i me I n c o m e A s s e tM a n a g e m e n t , In c. (P rim e ) s u e dOn e Da l l a s Ce nt r e As s o c i a t e s , L. P. ( O D CA ) s e e ki ng t o r e c o ve r$ 75 0, 00 0 i n e ar ne s tm o ne y. Pr i m e a s s e r t e d v ar i o us contractan d f

rau d c l ai m s. O D C A m oved f or s u m m ary j u dg m en ton allcl ai m s, w h ic h th e d is tr ic t c o u r t g r a n te d
. P r im e a p p e a ls
. United States Court of App eals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D December

23, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 09- 10349

The district court initially refuse d to grant summary ju dgment onth e co ntract cl aim 1 because ther e was a factual di spute as tow ho ha d breach ed the contr act. After ODCA file d a supplement toits motionfor s ummaryj udgment, the court det ermin ed th at Pri me h ad faile d toall ege da ma gesan d grante d su mmaryj u dgme nt onth e co ntr actclaim
. 2 P ri m e a nd OD CA e nt e r e d a Pur c has e a nd Sa l e Agr e e m e nt(t he Agr e e m e nt ) f

o ra c o m m e r c i alb ui l di n g i n D al l as , Te xa s . As pa r to f t he A gr ee m en t, P ri m e d ep osited $7 5 0 , 0 0 0 i n ea rn est m on ey i n an escro w acco u n t. The pa r t i e s r e al i z e d t he y w o ul d b e una bl e t o c l o s e t he s al e b y t he i ni t i alc l o s i ng d a t e . T h e r e a f

t e r , t h e ye x e c u t e d fo u ra me n d me n t s t o t h e A g r e e me n t , e a c h t i me agr ee i ng t o e xt end t he c l os i ng dat e a nd/ ort he dea dl i ne by w h i ch P ri m e w as r e qui r e d t o m ak e an ad di t i o nal e xt e ns i o n de po s i t o f $1 , 00 0, 00 0. As pa r to f t he second such a m en dm en t , P ri m e ex pressl y an d i rrevoc ably di rect ed the rel ease o f t he i ni t i al $ 750 , 00 0 de po s i tt o O D CA

. U l t i m at e l y, Pr i m e fai l e d t o pa y t he ad di t i o nale xt e ns i o n de po s i t
. OD CA t e r m i nat e d t h e Ag r e e m e n ta n dr e t a i ne d t he $75 0, 000 t h at Pri m e h ad rel eased as p artof the sec on d am en dm en t
. Pri m e t h en f i l ed the i n st an tsui tseeki n g t o rec ou p the $75 0, 000 based on , i n t er al i a, breach
o f c o n t r ac t , m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , a n d mo n e yh a d a n d r e c e i v e d t h e o r i e s . ODCA f i l ed a m ot i on forsum m ary j u dg m en ton allof P ri m e’ s c l ai m s. Th e di st ri ctcourt g r a n t e d O D C A ’ s mo t i o n a n d e n t e r e d j u d g me n ta g a i n s tP r i me o n a l li t s c l a i ms for re li e f. 1 W e r evi ew t he di st r i c tc our t ’ s gr antof s um m ar y j udgm en t d e novo . A ck er m a n n v. W

y eth Ph a rm a ce u tica ls , 5 2 6 F .3d 2 0 3 , 2 0 7 ( 5 t h C ir. 2 0 0 8 ). Sum m ar y j u d g m e nti s pr o pe ri f t he m o va ntde m o ns t r at e s t he a bs e nc e o f g e nui ne i s s u e s o f

ma t e r i a lfa c ta n d i t s e n t i t l e m e n tt o j u d g me n ta s a ma t t e ro f l a w. T h u rm an v. S ears, R oebu ck & Co. , 9 52 F
. 2d 1 28, 131 ( 5th C i r. 199 2)

. B ecau se j u ri sd i cti on i s p rem i sed u p on dive rsit y a n d the A gr ee m e n t in v olved pr op erty lo c a te d in D a lla s , T e x a s , w e a p p l y T e x a s s u b s ta n tiv e la w . S ee Inst on e Tra vel T ech Mari n e & Of

f shore v. I

n t ’lS h i pp i ng Part n ers , I

n c. , 33 4 F
. 3 d 42 3 , 42 7 ( 5 th C ir. 2 0 0 3 ).N o. 09- 10349

3 U nde rTe xa s l aw, a c o ur t i nt e r pr e t i ng a c o nt r ac ts e e ks t o di s c e r n t he t r ue in te n t of th e p a r tie s a s s ta te d in th e co n tr a c t. Na t ’lUn i o n Fi r e I n s . Co

. v . CBI Ind u s. , I

n c. , 9 0 7 S .W .2 d 5 1 7 , 5 2 0 (T e x . 1 9 9 5 ). “W h e n th e r e is n o a m b ig u ity , it i s th e cou rt’ s d u ty to give the w ord s u sed the i r p l a i n m ea n i n g.” Puc k e t tv . U. S. Fi re Ins. Co. , 6 7 8 S .W .2 d 9 3 6 , 9 3 8 (T e x . 1 9 8 4 ). T he s e c o nd a m e ndm e ntt o t he A greem en tcontai n s t h e cr i t i call an gu age: In con sider a ti on f

or th e A gr ee m en t by [ O C D A ] to ex ten d the D a te o f C lo s in g , (I) [P r im e ] h e r e b ye x p r e s s lya n d irr e v o c a b ly di r e c t s t he T i tl e C om p a n y to re l ea se a n d pa y th e [ $ 7 5 0 , 0 0 0 ] In i ti a lD ep osit to [O C D A ]
. . . . [ T ]he In i ti a lD ep osit
. . . sh a l lbe n on -ref u n d a b l e to [P r im e ] b u t s h a ll b e a p p lic a b le to th e P u r c h a s e P r ic e a t c lo s in g. . . . The t r i alc o ur tde t e r m i ne d t hatt he t e r m s of t he A gr e e m e ntw e r e una m bi guo us w i t h re gar d t o t he r ef und abi l i t y o f

t he i ni t i aldepo si t
. W e a gr ee . As an i ni t i al
m a tt e r , th e e x p r e s s te r m s o f th e a m e n d m e n t p r o v id e t h a t t h e in itia l d e p o s it

“ sh a ll b e n o n -r efu n d a b le
. ” Fur t he r , t he s e c o nd a m e ndm e nt ’ s una m bi guo us t e r ms p r o v i d e t h a t , i n c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o ra n e x t e n s i o n o f

t h e c l o s i n gd a t e , P r i me

“ ex p re ss ly a n dirre v o ca b ly d ir e c ts th e tit le c o m p a n y to r e le a s e ” t h e in itia l d e p o s it to O D C A

. B la c k ’ s D ic tio n a r yd e fin e s “e x p r e s s ” a s “[c ]le a r lya n d u n m is ta k a b ly
c o m m uni c at e d, ” a nd “ i r r e vo c ab l e ” a s “ [ u] nal t e r ab l e [ o r ] c o m m i t t e d b e yo nd
r e c a l l [. ]” B LAC K’ S L AW D I C T I ONARY ( 8 t h e d
. 2 0 0 4 )

. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t he l an gu age ati s s ue l e ad s t o o nl y o ne r e as o nab l e c o nc l us i o n: i n o r de rt o e xt e nd t he
c l o s i n gd a t e , P r i me a g r e e d t o i r r e v o c a b l yr e l e a s e t h e $ 7 5 0 , 0 0 0 d e p o s i tt o OC DA
a n d th a t d e p o s it is n o n -r e fu n d a b le
. S ee Nat’ lUn i on , 907 S. W
. 2d at520. U n der t h e p l ai n langu age of the second am en dm en t , t h e onl y actrequi red byO D CA f

o rt he d eposi t to b e c o m e no n- r e f unda bl e w as t he e xt e ns i o n o f t he cl osi n g da t e. W h en O C D Aex t ended t he c l os i ng dat e, t he i ni t i aldepo si tw as exp ress l y an d i rrevoc ably r el eased to O D C Aan d thu s c eased to be propert y of P ri m e. P ri m e b ar gai ned f oran ex t ens i on o f

t he c l os i ng dat e a nd once t hatN o. 09- 10349

4 extensi on w as gran t ed, P ri m e ha d received i t s c on si derati on an d could no l on ger reco ve r i ts i n i ti a lde p osit. T o est abli sh a breach of contr act cl ai m u n der T exas l aw , a pl ai n t i f f m u st p r o v e , in te ra lia , d a m a g e s to th e p la in tiff r e s u ltin gfr o m th a t b r e a c h
. Harr i s v. A m er. Prot ect i on I

n s. Co. , 158 S. W
. 3d 614, 622

) 23 ( Tex. A pp. — FortW or t h 2005,
n o p et. ). B eca u se P r i m e so u gh t on l y th e d ep osit m on ey as d a m a ge s f or it s con tract cl a i m , an d P ri m e is n o lo n g er en ti tl ed to t h ese f u n d s, P ri m e fail ed to
a l l eg e a l lthe elem en ts of a bre a ch of con tract. T h e d i stri ct co u rt w a s corre ct t o g r a n ts u mma r yj u d g me n to n P r i me ’ s c o n t r a c tc l a i m. Pr i m e a r gue s t hatt h i s sam e l o gi c do e s no tdo o m i t s “ m o ne y hada nd
rece i ve d ” cl a i m be ca u se th e claim i s eq u i tab l e in n a tu re. P r i m e a sk s u s to i gn ore t h e express t erm s of the contractb ecau se “i n eq u i t y an d good consci en ce” t h e mo n e yb e l o n g s t o P r i me . A l t h o u g h c l o a k e d i n t h e g u i s e o f e q u i t y , P r i me s e e ks t o r e as s e r ti t s c o nt r ac tc l ai m , a rgui ng t hatO CD A sh o ul d r e t ur n t he d e p o s i t b e c a u s e i t s l a c k o f c o o p e r a t i o n i n d u e d i l i g e n c e i s t o b l a m e f o r t he col l ap se of

the A greem en t
. G en eral l y speak i n g, w h en a val i d, express c on t ract
covers t h e subj ect m att er of t h e pa rt i es’ di spu t e, t h ere can be no recovery un der
a qu asi

- contractt h eory . F ort u n e Prod
. Co. v. Con oco, I n c. , 52 S. W
. 3d 671 ( Tex. 2 0 0 0 ); Tra n sA m . Na tu ra l G a s C o rp . v . Fin k els tein , 9 3 3 S. W
. 2 d 5 9 1 , 6 0 0 ( Te x. App.

) S a n A n to n io 1 9 9 6 , w r it d e n ie d ); L o n e S ta r S tee l Co . v . S co tt , 7 59 S. W
. 2d 14 4, 1 54 ( Tex
. App.

)Texar kana 1988, w r i tdeni ed)

. Part i es s houl d be bound by t he i re xp r e s s a gr e e m e nt s a nd when a va l i d a gr e e m e ntal r e ad y ad dr e s s e s t he
m at t e r , r e c o ve r y unde ra n e qui t able t he o r y i s g e ne r al l y i nc o ns i s t e ntw i t h t he
e x p r e s s a g r e e m e n t. Se e Tr ansAm
. Nat ur alG as , 933 S. W
. 2d at600. Th e Texas C ou rtof

A pp eal s has n ot ed that t h i s r u l e i s pa rt i cul arl y ap propri ate w h en s o p h is tic a te d p a r tie s b a r g a in fo re x p r e s s co n tr a c ts
. Id
. W e se e no r eas on to al l o w Pr i m e t o e s c ap e t he e xp r e s s l ang uag e o f t he s e c o nd a m e ndm e ntund e rt heN o. 09- 10349

Although the district co urt decide d this i ssue b ased on its interpretationof the 2 co ntr act , wear e fr eeto aff ir m ondif

fe re nt gro u n ds
. See Seneca v. Ph illips P et roleu m C

o. , 96 3 F.2 d 76 2 (5 th Cir. 1 992) (noting that the court of appeals can affirm on differe nt gro und s than thos e reli edupo nb yth e di strict co urt). B ec au se we de ci deth e is su e ondif fe re nt gro u n ds , we expres s no op inio na s to th e me ritsof th e di strictc ourt’san aly si s. See Terra Res., Inc. v. Lake Charles Dred

gin g & Towing

I nc. , 6 9 5F .2 d 8 2 8 , 8 3 2 n .9( 5 thC ir
. 1 9 8 3). E ach o f th e s e p ar at e f r au d

- r e l at e d c l ai m s b ro u ght b y Pri m e s h ar e i n c ommon the 3 requirement th at the plaintiff must prove ju stifiablereliance o n the represe ntation s made by th e defe n dant. See T E X. BUS

. & C OM. C ODE§ 2 7 .0 1 (a)(1)( B), (a)(2 )(D) (s tatutoryf rau d) ; Ernst&Y

oun g, L.L .P. v. P

acific Mu t. Life Ins. C o. , 5 1 S .W .3 d 5 7 3 , 5 7 7(T ex . 2 0 0 1 ) (f rau d) ; Haase v. Glazne r , 6 2 S. W. 3 d 7 9 5 , 7 9 8(T ex . 2 0 0 1 ) (f rau dule nt in duce me nt) ; Fed. Lan d Bank Ass’n v. Sloane , 8 2 5 S. W. 2 d 4 3 9 , 4 4 2 (T ex . 1 9 9 1 ) (negligent misre pr es entation); C old wel l Banker Assocs. v. Ryan Eq uit y P art ners Lt d. , 181 S.W.3d 879 , 888 (Tex

. App.–Dalla s 200 6, no pe t. ) (s tatutoryf

rau d)

. 5 gui s e o f e qui t y and f i nd no e r r o r i n t he gr ant o f s um m ar y j udg m e nt o n t he
mo n e yh a d a n d r e c e i v e d c l a i m. 2 P ri m e a l so a rg u es th a t t h e d i stri ct cou rt w a s i n corre ct t o fi n d tha t i ts f r auda nd n e gl i ge ntm i s r e pr e s e nt at i o n c l ai m s fai l e d b e c aus e di s c l ai m e r s i n t he A gr ee m entnega ted an y r el i ance . U nderTexas l aw , c ont r ac t i ng par t i es m ay 3
c r e a te co n tr a c tu a l p r o v i s io n s th a t d is c la im re lia n c e . See For e s tO i lCor p. v. McA l l en , 2 6 8 S .W .3 d 5 1 , 6 1 (T e x . 2 0 0 8 ); S chlum bergerT ech. Corp. v. S w an son , 959 S. W
. 2d 171 , 181 ( T ex. 199 7)

. “ T h e contr ac tan d the ci rcum st an ces s u r r o u n d in gits fo r m a tio n d e te r m in e s w h e th e rth e d i s c l a im e ro f r e lia n c e is b i n d i n g.” S chlum berger , 959 S. W
. 2d at179–80
. The T exas Suprem e Courthas f ou n d a cl eara nd s peci f i c i n t en tt o di scl ai m rel i an ce w h en “ soph i st i cat ed p art i es, r e pr e s e nt e d b y c o m pe t e ntl e ga lc o uns e l , i nc l ude d a n e m pha t i c pa r t i c ul ari zed d i sclaim er of reli a n ce in th e con tract. ” S chlum berger , 9 5 9 S .W .2 d a t 1 8 0
. A s th e d i stri ct c o u r t n oted , this w a s a m u l ti m i l l i on do l l a r arm ’ s l en gth t ran sact i on fo r th e sal e of a dow n t ow n D al l as com m erci albu i l di n g betw een s o p h is tic a te d p a r tie s , b o th re p r e s e n te d b ya tt o r n e y s . S ee F o re st O il , 268 S. W
. 3d
a t 6 0

– 6 1 ; Co a s t a lBa n k S SB v . Ch a s e Ba n k of Tex a s , N. A. , 135 S. W
. 3d 840, 843 ( Tex
. App.

) H ous t on 2004)

. The A gr e e m e ntbe t w e e n O D CA and Pr i m e c o nt ai nsN o. 09- 10349

6 e xt e ns i ve di s c l ai m e r s i n whi c h Pr i m e di s c l ai m s r e l i ance on r e pr e s e nt at i o ns m ad e by O D C Aan d speci f i cal l y an y rel i an ce on t h e t ruth , a ccu racy, or c o m p le te n e s s o f a n yd o c u m e n ts re la tin gto th e p r o p e r ty
. F u r th e r m o r e , th e r e is
a m e r g e rcla u s e w h i c h p r e v e n ts re lia n c e o n la te ro r a l re p r e s e n ta tio n s . S ee Arm s t r o ng v . Am
. Ho m e Shi e l d Cor p. , 3 3 3 F .3d 5 5 6 , 5 7 1 (5t h C ir. 2 0 0 3 ). G i ven t he di s c l ai m e r s a nd t ak i ng i nt o a c c o untt he na t u re of the t r ans ac t i o n a nd t he t o t al i t y o f

t he c i r c um s t anc e s s urr o undi ng t he Agr e e m e nt , w e a gr e e w i t h t he di s t r i c tc o ur tt hatt he j us t i f i ab l e r e l i an ce e l e m e ntc o m m o n t o a l lo f t he fr a u d -r e la te d cla im s h a s b e e n n e g a te d a s a m a tt e ro f la w . S ee U
. S. Q ues tLt d. v. Ki m m o ns , 2 2 8 F .3 d 3 9 9 , 4 0 3 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ); Fo r e s tOi lCo r p. , 268 S. W
. 3d at 6 0

– 6 1 ; S chlum berger , 959 S. W
. 2d at179–80
. AF F I RMED.