Opinion ID: 895256
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Defining any

Text: We disagree, however, with the court of appeals' conclusion regarding interpretation of the word any in the following contract provision: The Authority intends to call a bond election in the near future but is not obligated to do so.... The Authority does agree, however, that it shall include in any bond election it does hold subsequent to the effective date of this Agreement bond authorization in an amount sufficient to pay the purchase price of the Facilities. The Authority says this provision requires the reimbursement measure be placed on one ballot only, upon which it will have fulfilled its contractual obligation. The Developers, on the other hand, contend the provision requires that the Authority place the measure on every bond authorization ballot until the end of time, or until the measure is approved. The court of appeals agreed with the Authority, holding that, although the pertinent sentence could reasonably be interpreted either way, ... the balance of the paragraph clearly indicates that only one election was contemplated. Kirby Lake II, 274 S.W.3d at 46. Texas courts defining any have generally interpreted it to mean every. [9] Those decisions, however, have been so rooted in context that they provide little guidance in this case. See Texas Co. v. Schriewer, 38 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.Civ. App.-Waco 1931) (The word `any' is a flexible word that may have any one of several meanings according to its use.... Its meaning is often restrained, limited, or influenced by the subject-matter or manner in which it is used.), aff'd in part, rev'd in part sub nom. Smith v. Tex. Co., 53 S.W.2d 774 (Tex. Comm'n App.1932). Accordingly, we will examine the Agreements' grammatical structure, in context. The Authority and the Kirby Lake II court point to the use of singular nouns in the succeeding sentence as indicative that any means one time: The paragraph's first sentence states that the Water Authority `intends to call a bond election' but it cannot predict when or if `such an election... will occur.' Unlike `any,' the words `a' and `an' are always singular. Kirby Lake II, 274 S.W.3d at 46. However, the fact that a and an are singular does not foreclose interpreting any to mean each or one of allboth of which would require singular antecedents. See, e.g., Schriewer, 38 S.W.2d at 145 (In its broad, distributive sense, the sense in which the word is very frequently used, it may have the meaning of `all,' `every,' `each,' or `each one of all.'). The more conventional grammatical meaning of the term, then, suggests that the proposition must be included in every bond election the Authority holds, until the voters approve reimbursement. Moreover, the Developers argue that the Authority ignores the Agreements' overall structure and purpose, which was to construct facilities that the Authority would ultimately purchase (Subject to other terms and provisions hereof, the Developer agrees to sell and the Authority agrees to purchase all the completed portions of the facilities....). We agree with the Developers that we must evaluate the overall agreement to determine what purposes the parties had in mind at the time they signed the Agreements. See Don's Bldg. Supply, Inc. v. OneBeacon Ins. Co., 267 S.W.3d 20, 23 (Tex.2008) (Effectuating the parties' expressed intent is our primary concern.). Section 4.01 provides that the Developer shall lease all operable portions of the facilities to the Authority without charge until such time as the Authority acquires such portions; provided that such lease shall terminate upon the acquisition by the Authority of all the Facilities. (Emphasis added.) Had the parties envisioned only one bond election, they could have easily stated that the Authority may lease the facilities until conclusion of that particular election. Instead, the Agreement permits a continued leasehold until such time as the Authority acquires [the Facilities]. Moreover, the Agreement is silent as to the parties' obligations in the event the bond measure does not pass. While it expressly acknowledges that the Authority has no existing voter authorization to issue any bonds to pay for the cost of the Facilities, and does not anticipate that funds will be available for such costs without a voter approved bond sale,  it at no point relinquishes the Authority from its obligation to include [the bond measure] in any bond election it does hold. (Emphases added.) The Kirby Lake II court noted that the Agreement does not state that a bond measure would be submitted to voters repeatedly until approved. 274 S.W.3d at 46. However, assuming that any means every, such additional language would be superfluous, as the Agreement plainly states that the Authority is to include the measure in any bond election it does hold. The more blatant omission would be the absence of a provision limiting the Authority's perpetual lease of the facilities without charge in the event the measure does not pass. Unless the Authority were obligated to submit a measure to reimburse the Developers in each bond election, the Developers would have essentially forfeited their interest in facilities they built and paid for. See Aquaplex, Inc. v. Rancho La Valencia, Inc., 297 S.W.3d 768, 774 (Tex.2009) (Forfeitures are not favored in Texas, and contracts are construed to avoid them.). It is unlikely that the Developers intended to convey water and sewer lines as a gift. Because we conclude that the contract, as a whole, contemplates the eventual sale of the Facilities, and because we construe contracts to avoid forfeiture where possible, we hold that the Agreements require the Authority to submit a bond proposal in every bond election it chooses to hold. See REO Indus., Inc. v. Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of Am., 932 F.2d 447, 454 (5th Cir. 1991) (Texas courts will not construe a contract to result in a forfeiture unless it cannot be construed in any other way.); Sheppard v. Avery, 89 Tex. 301, 34 S.W. 440, 442 (1896) (A forfeiture of rights of property is not favored by the courts, and laws will be construed to prevent rather than to cause such forfeiture.).