Case Explained: Summary Calendar 20100 Eastex, L.L.C. Plaintiff— v. Saltgrass, Incorporated Defendant—

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Filed: 2026-07-06 The Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Saltgrass, Incorporated, holding that the district court correctly interpreted a Reciprocal Easement Agreement to require Eastex’s consent before demolishing or constructing new buildings on its parcel. The court applied Texas contract law, which mandates that while ambiguous contracts are ordinarily resolved by a jury, undisputed extrinsic evidence resolving an ambiguity allows the court to interpret the contract as a matter of law. The court found that Steven Scheinthal, the executive who drafted and executed the agreement for both parties at the time, provided uncontroverted testimony establishing that the intent of Section 3.3 was to grant each owner the right to withhold consent for any new construction or demolition on the other’s parcel. Because this extrinsic evidence definitively resolved the contractual ambiguity without creating a genuine dispute of material fact, no jury trial was required under the Seventh Amendment. Additionally, the court dismissed Eastex’s appeal regarding attorney fees awarded by the district court for lack of jurisdiction, noting that the notice of appeal was filed before the fee order was entered and failed to include the fee issue. The case is remanded to the district court solely to determine the specific amount of Saltgrass’s appellate attorney fees. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.