Jim Maddox Props., LLC v. Wem Equity Capital Invs., Ltd.

EVELYN V. KEYES

Affirmed.

John P. Venzke, The Venzke Law Firm, Houston, TX, for Appellants. E.F. Mano DeAyala, Edward P. Keenan, Buck Keenan LLP, Houston, TX, for Appellee.

EVELYN V. KEYES, Justice.

Appellants, Jim Maddox Properties, LLC and Jim Maddox (collectively, “Maddox”), appeal the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of appellee, WEM Equity Capital Investments, Ltd. (“WEM”), on WEM's breach of contract claim. In three issues, Maddox argues that the trial court erred in granting WEM's motion for summary judgment because WEM failed to prove that Maddox breached the contract and because WEM failed to prove as a matter of law that it had not waived compliance with the payment terms of the contract.

We affirm.

We conclude that Maddox failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding his affirmative defense. See Centeq, 899 S.W.2d at 197; Haskell, 193 S.W.3d at 95. Accordingly, we hold that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of WEM on its breach of contract claims. See Kyle, 232 S.W.3d at 358.

We overrule Maddox's issue arguing that WEM failed to prove as a matter of law that it had not waived compliance with the payment terms of the contract.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court.