Kelly v. General Interior Construction, Inc.
301 S.W.3d 653 | Texas Supreme Court | 2010
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
A Texas subcontractor (GIC) sued Arizona-based officers of a general contractor (Diva) for breach of contract and fraud over a Houston hotel renovation project. The Texas Supreme Court ruled that the court had no jurisdiction over the Arizona defendants because GIC failed to allege they committed any wrongful acts in Texas. The decision matters because it shows you must prove defendants have sufficient connection to Texas before suing them there—simply doing business with a Texas company isn't enough.
Key Takeaways
- •When suing out-of-state contractors or their owners, clearly allege specific wrongful acts they committed in your state, not just that they did business there
- •Personal visits to your state or sending documents there may not establish jurisdiction—you need direct involvement in the alleged wrongdoing within the state
- •File a special appearance early if you're sued in the wrong state; courts will dismiss cases lacking proper jurisdiction
Trial court abused discretion by failing to give specific reason for granting new trial.
Frequently Asked Question
Can I sue an Arizona contractor in Texas court if they worked on my project here?
Not automatically. You must prove the defendant committed the wrongful acts (breach, fraud, etc.) in Texas, not just that they did business there. Simply visiting Texas or sending invoices isn't enough. You need to allege specific actions they took in Texas that caused your injury.
Related Cases
Gall v. United States
Appellate courts must review all sentences under an abuse-of-discretion standard regardless of whether they fall inside or outside the Guidelines range, and cannot require extraordinary circumstances to justify sentences outside the range.
Piotrowski v. City of Houston
Municipal liability under § 1983 requires proof of official policy as the moving force; isolated employee misconduct insufficient, and equal protection claim time-barred.
Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena
Federal race-based classifications must be analyzed under strict scrutiny regardless of whether they benefit or burden minorities, and the Fifth Amendment's equal protection obligation equals the Fourteenth Amendment's.
Northeastern Florida Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America v. City of Jacksonville
An association of contractors has standing to challenge a minority set-aside ordinance without proving any member would have won a contract absent the ordinance; the injury is denial of equal competitive opportunity, not loss of a specific contract.
In Re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc.
The Civil Commitment of Sexually Violent Predators Act is civil, not criminal, and does not violate due process even when applied to incompetent defendants.
Edwin P. Harrison, and United States of America, Party in Interest v. Westinghouse Savannah River Company
The Fourth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal, holding that the False Claims Act broadly reaches false statements made to obtain government contract approval, not just false payment claims themselves.