Contract Reformation Because Of Mutual Mistake of Fact
John Wilson • January 28, 2021
Court Reformation of Contracts Due To Mutual Mistake
It is a well settlement principle that Courts do not make contracts for litigants, they enforce them. The remedy of reformation beyond that which the jury found is not available merely under the allegations of plaintiff's petition.
No Contract Reformation Unless The Mistake Was Mutual
In order for a Court to reform the contract as sought by appellant based upon mistake, there must be clear, exact and satisfactory proof that the mistake was mutual. See Simpson v. Williams, 574 S.W. 2d 874 at 875 (Tex Civ. App. 1978); citing Pegues v. Dilworth, 134 Tex. 169, 132 S.W.2d 582 (1939). In Continental Oil Company v. Doornbos, 402 S.W. 879 (Tex. 1966), the Court noted a plaintiff may not seek by reformation to increase the interest actually granted through an oral agreement and to reduce proportionately the interest reserved to the grantor without a finding that such agreement was made or omitted from the a deed by mutual mistake:
“…Thus, under guise of seeking a construction of the deed and a declaration of the rights after reformation in one respect, the plaintiffs were actually seeking, and the judgment actually grants, reformation of the deed in two respects-to include in the deed an express provision granting to Doornbos all royalty in excess of one-eighth and a provision reducing the 1/32nd royalty reserved to Continental when necessary to assure that Doornbos would get all royalty in excess of one-eighth. There is no evidence in the record that any such agreement was made or was omitted from the deed by mutual mistake.[1][2][3] It is basic to the remedy of reformation that the true agreement between the parties be shown. Sun Oil Company v. Bennett, 125 Tex. 540, 84 S.W.2d 447 (1935); Pegues v. Dilworth, 134 Tex. 169, 132 S.W.2d 582 (1939); Burrows v. Seale, 148 Tex. 411, 225 S.W.2d 966 (1950). Once such agreement be established, equity may reform the written instrument so as to conform thereto, but cannot create and bring into being an agreement not made by the parties. The parties her agreed that Doornbos should have all the royalty over one-eighth. They also agreed that Continental should retain a 1/32nd royalty interest. But, as above pointed out, they never agreed that the Continental reserved interest should be subordinated to the interest conveyed to Doornbos. The subordination portion of the trial court's decree purports to rest on the rule of construction announced in Duhig v. Peavy-Moore Lumber Co., 135 Tex. 503, 144 S.W.2d 878 (1940). The results of the judgment are achieved by switching from equitable principles of reformation to legal rules of construction half way through the solution of the controversy, so to speak. The Duhig rule is to be applied to ascertain the meaning of an instrument in the absence of an appeal to equity. When reformation is sought, the oral agreement preceding the written instrument is treated as the binding contract and the written instrument made to conform thereto. Pegues v. Dilworth, 134 Tex. 169, 132 S.W.2d 582 (1939). A provision not contained in the preceding oral agreement cannot be inserted in the reformed written agreement under the guise of reformation. While the circumstances of this case may have at one time served as a basis for rescission or other remedy, they do not present a case for reformation.”
The construction of a deed containing a reservation repugnant to a grant, and in which the reservation must yield to the grant, is not involved here. This is a case in which the plaintiff seeks by reformation to increase the interest actually granted and to reduce proportionately the interest reserved to the grantor. There is no evidence of any such agreement and, accordingly, reformation is denied.”
Specific Performance Of Contract For Sale Of Land
Court will not order specific performance of contract for sale of land or interest therein unless contract describes the land or interest or within itself furnishes means by which property may be identified with reasonable certainty. See Nash, Supra, at 520. In the case of Long v. Humble Oil & Refining Company, 154 S.W.2d 925, 931 (Tex. Civ. App. 1940, writ ref. ), the court quotes with approval from Williston on Contracts as follows:
“The province of reformation is to make a writing express the bargain which the parties desired to be put in writing. Agreements of which they did not desire written expression will not be put into writing by decree of the court. Therefore, if parties intentionally make an oral agreement which is unenforceable for the reason that it is not in writing, the court cannot order a writing executed even though the parties erroneously supposed their oral bargain was legally valid. Similarly, if parties to a written instrument understood that part of their previous agreement has been omitted from the writing and rely on oral agreement with one another to vary or add in certain respects to the written agreement, whether they rely on moral obligation or believe that a variation is legally valid, equity cannot reform the writing by the insertion of the oral agreement.”
The Court Cannot Reform A Contract By Insertion Of An Oral Agreement
The Court in Friedrich v. Moke, 296 S.W. 2d 565 (Tex. Civ. App. 1956) points out that it is a well recognized general rule that where ‘some of the essential terms of a contract are left for the future determination or agreement of the parties themselves, the contract is considered not to be certain and complete within the rule requiring certainty and definiteness as a condition of the specific performance of a contract.” “In our opinion the testimony not only of the appellant but of appellee as well, disclosed that the parties contemplated a further agreement between the parties as to a sign rental lease covering Mr. Moke's property.” See Moke, Id. In such an instance, the Court cannot reform the contract by the insertion of an oral agreement or any terms given there was no meeting of the minds rising to the level of a mutual mistake.
Copyright and Translated Content: Who Owns the Creative Rights? Understanding Copyright Law and Translation Copyright law protects creative work and bestows sole authority over the work upon the creators. For example, the owner of the work of a novel has the right over the work under the concept of the right under the copyright. Courts have found that “the degree of protection afforded by the copyright is measured by what is actually copyrightable in the publication and not by the entire publication.” See, e.g., Dorsey v. Old Sur. Life Ins. Co., 98 F.2d 872, 873 (10th Cir. 1938) (emphasis added). For translations, the situation is not very clear. Translations involve creative judgments over word translation and not the translation of mere words. Hence the knowledge about the applicability of the concept of the right over the work is essential for establishing the right over the work. For example, a Court in the Northern District of California stated that: “ the determinative question is whether Plaintiff holds a valid copyright. ” Signo Trading Intern. Ltd. v. Gordon, 535 F. Supp. 362, 363 (N.D. Cal. 1981). The Signo Trading Court dismissed Plaintiff’s infringement claims because plaintiff did not have a valid copyright as a matter of law in the translations and transliterations at issue because they lacked the “requisite originality.” Id. at 365. Can Translation Be Considered a Creative Process? The Practice of Translating Translation goes beyond the replacement of one word by the equivalent word from the source text. Translating literary work, poetry, and fiction with deeper meanings beyond the surface text is a complex, artistic process. Translating books like The Iliad, for instance, requires the practice of artistic translation to translate the emotions, thoughts, and the culture correctly. Technical Translations and Legal Translations Conversely, technical writing and texts for the law need less creativity and instead value correctness over all else. These writing forms require strict adherence to the original sense, leaving very little room for artistic interpretation. Translations for these writing forms thus typically involve less creative contribution and less potential for the work being protected by copyright. Why Is Creativity Important for Translations for Copyright? Originality when translating For a work to be subject to copyright, some creativity, however slight, is essential. Even when the translation is taken from the work, the translation also includes some creative work by the translator. This creativity can make the translation subject to copyright. A derivative work must “recast, transform[], or adapt[]” a preexisting work and “consist[] of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship.” Id. In other words, it must change or alter the pre-existing work’s content and must itself be an original work of authorship. The Supreme Court stated that “ [t]he sine qua non of copyright is originality ” and that “ [t]o qualify for copyright protection, a work must be original to the author. ” Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., Inc., 499 U.S. 340, 361 (1991) at 345. “Original, as the term is used in copyright, means only that the work was independently created by the author (as opposed to copied from other works), and that it possesses at least some minimal degree of creativity.” Id. (citing 1 M. Nimmer & D. Nimmer, Copyright §§ 2.01[A], [B] (1990)). In granting a Rule 12 motion to dismiss, the Signo Trading Court held that: " It is inconceivable that anyone could copyright a single word or a commonly used short phrase, in any language. It is also inconceivable that a valid copyright could be obtained for a phonetic spelling, using standard Roman letters, of such words or phrases. Although lists of words and translations of larger works may be copyrightable, Plaintiff cannot claim credit for any of the elements which make those things copyrightable. For these reasons, Plaintiff does not hold a valid copyright on the translations or transliterations ... " Signo Trading, 535 F. Supp. at 365. The Problem of the Derivative Work However, translations are generally "derivative works" - derived from the work of another. Because of this, the owner or author of the work is generally required to agree to the translation. Translations made illegally can be held under the classification of copyright violations, even when the translator has added creative elements. Who Has the Right over the Translated Work? Employer-Commissioned Translations Ownership of the copyright for the translation work varies. If the translation is commissioned by the owner of the original work, the owner will retain the right. Even when the translator adds creativity by passing over the original emotions and thoughts, the owner will not necessarily lose the right over the translation work. In some circumstances, the translation work can be accredited by the translator without them holding the right over the work. Independent Translations If a translation is performed independently by the translator, the translator can even be identified as the co-author of the translation. Nevertheless, the author typically has the underlying copyright, restricting the translator’s right over the work. Creative Translations from the Public Domain In certain cases, a translation may be creative enough to warrant its own copyright. For example, a translator adapting a classic work or a book in the public domain into modern language may introduce enough originality to qualify for copyright protection. However, direct, word-for-word translations are typically not considered original enough to receive new copyright protection. What About Machine Translations? The Human Creativity Copyright Requirement Machine-generated translations, including those produced by platforms like OpenAI , operate through advanced algorithms that replicate language patterns rather than capture the human touch. Unlike translations crafted by human translators who often infuse cultural insight and genuine emotion into the work, OpenAI's output is rooted in statistical patterns and data. Consequently, while these translations are impressively efficient and accurate, they typically fall short of the originality required for copyright protection. This distinction underscores the human creativity requirement needed to secure a valid copyright . Ultimately, although machine-generated translations serve as powerful tools, they do not offer the same legal and creative protections as those provided by human translators. The Bottom Line: Navigating Copyright in Translations Translations occupy the middle ground under the law of the copyright. Albeit the right of the original author generally has the right under the copyright, the right under the copyright can also be claimed by the translator provided the translation is creative enough. Central considerations here include the creativity the translator has added, the nature of the work being translated, and whether the work is under the public domain. These considerations establish the right of the owner under the copyright for the translation. Why Wilson Whitaker Rynell for Your Copyright Work? At Wilson Whitaker Rynell, our professional lawyers specialize in the practice of copyright law and copyright litigation , including the complex subject matter of translation work. We can provide you with advice about the ownership of your work under the provisions of the copyright, and protect your creative property. If you are the author, the publisher, or the translator, you can rely upon the advice from our firm. Copyright Translation FAQS
Strategic Legal Representation for Complex Business Litigation
Female Divorce Attorneys in the Dallas-Fort Worth Area In many instances, divorce cases are challenging and emotionally taxing experiences. For this reason, it’s common for people to prefer working with an attorney of the same gender because they feel as though the attorney can empathize and understand their situation more. At the end of the day, the gender of your attorney may not affect the outcome of your case, but it’s important to feel as comfortable as possible while navigating through the process. At Wilson Whitaker Rynell, our experienced female divorce attorneys offer compassionate and empathetic approaches while they develop a comprehensive legal strategy to represent you. Why Should You Choose a Female Divorce Lawyer? There are many reasons why hiring a female divorce attorney can help you throughout your divorce. For one, they often have experience working on issues that disproportionately affect women in divorce such as spousal support (alimony), child custody disputes, and asset division. Additionally, female divorce lawyers offer a unique level of empathy, understanding, and communication. As a result, many clients feel that they are more approachable and compassionate, which is beneficial when dealing with the emotional turmoil of the process. More importantly, female divorce attorneys are more familiar with how the court treats women in divorce cases and use this knowledge to strategically protect their clients’ interests, whether male or female. Why Our Female Divorce Attorneys May be Right for You At Wilson Whitaker Rynell, our female divorce attorneys are skilled, knowledgeable professionals, they also have many years of experience in handling complex divorce cases. Whether it’s issues surrounding custody of children, alimony, or asset division, our female divorce lawyers ensure each client receives high-quality legal advice. Our firm’s female divorce attorneys provide the highest level of personal attention, ensuring that each client’s unique needs and concerns are addressed through every step. Unique Challenges Women Face in Family Law Disputes in Texas Family law disputes can be emotionally charged and legally complex, especially for women navigating the process in Texas. Women often encounter unique challenges due to their roles in the marriage and family dynamic, particularly when it comes to child custody, child support, and the division of marital assets. Child Custody Challenges In many marriages, women take on the primary caregiving role for their children. However, when it comes to custody decisions, courts in Texas prioritize the best interests of the child over parental gender. While this often works in favor of mothers, women may still face hurdles in proving they are better suited to provide the stable environment the child needs, especially if their ex-spouse disputes custody. Factors such as work schedules, living arrangements, and financial stability can come under scrutiny. Child Support Issues While Texas law allows women to seek child support, collecting these payments can sometimes prove difficult. Women awarded child support may find themselves dealing with ex-spouses who delay payments, make partial payments, or refuse to pay altogether. Enforcing child support orders often requires legal intervention, which can add to the emotional and financial strain. Division of Marital Assets In Texas, a community property state, marital assets are typically divided equitably during divorce. Women who are awarded assets such as the family home may face challenges related to maintaining the property, refinancing a mortgage, or covering associated expenses. Additionally, women who sacrificed their careers to support their spouses or raise children may feel disadvantaged during the division of assets if their earning potential is limited compared to their ex-spouse. How Your Divorce Attorney Will Support You Each divorce case is unique, and having an experienced attorney standing by you is vital. Whether you’re dividing assets, negotiating child custody, or managing other complex legal issues, the female divorce attorneys at Wilson Whitaker Rynell are here to protect the interests of you and your family. Our attorneys will take the time to understand your unique circumstances and empower you to make informed decisions that support your career, family and future. When you choose a female divorce attorney from Wilson Whitaker Rynell, you can trust that they will: Prioritize your family’s best interests. Negotiate with integrity, ensuring fairness and transparency. Clearly explain all your options and their potential outcomes. Help you create the future you want by offering trusted legal advice. Use efficient methods to minimize unnecessary costs and keep the process manageable. Navigating family law disputes requires a thorough understanding of Texas family law and strong advocacy. Women facing divorce or other family law issues are encouraged to seek an experienced family law attorney who can provide personalized guidance. A skilled lawyer can help craft a strategy that protects their rights and ensures a fair resolution. This includes representing their interests in court, negotiating settlements, and helping enforce orders such as child support or spousal maintenance.
Understanding Writs of Execution in Texas: A Layperson’s Guide If a court determines that someone owes money to another party, the debtor—referred to as the "judgment debtor"—typically has 30 days to pay off the debt. If the debt remains unpaid after this time, the creditor, or "judgment creditor," can take legal action to enforce the payment through a Writ of Execution . This legal process, governed by Texas law, enables creditors to collect what they are owed by seizing and selling the debtor’s non-exempt assets. What Is a Writ of Execution? Under Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 629 , a Writ of Execution is a court order that authorizes a sheriff or constable to seize the debtor’s property to satisfy the debt. This writ is an essential tool for creditors when voluntary repayment has not occurred. Once the writ is issued, it is handed over to a county constable or sheriff, who is required to act “without delay” in collecting the debtor’s real and personal property. The seized property is then sold, and the proceeds are used to pay off the debt. If multiple writs are filed against the same debtor, the assets are distributed in the order the writs were received. What Property Can Be Seized Under a Writ of Execution? Texas law is very specific about which types of property can and cannot be seized to satisfy a judgment. Exempt Property Certain assets are protected from seizure under Texas Property Code § 41.001. These include: The debtor’s homestead (primary residence) Wages earned from employment Professionally prescribed health aids Workers’ compensation benefits College savings plans Some insurance benefits Personal property valued up to $50,000 for individuals and $100,000 for families Unique to Texas, the law also protects items like family Bibles, two firearms, pets, and for rural residents, livestock (e.g., 12 head of cattle and 120 fowl). This extensive list reflects Texas's cultural heritage and values. Non-Exempt Property Assets that are generally not exempt include: Vacation homes Timeshares Pleasure boats Airplanes Jewelry exceeding certain value thresholds The specific procedures for seizing different types of property are detailed in Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 639 . Can a Writ of Execution Be Avoided? Judgment debtors have a few options to avoid the execution of a writ: Filing a Supersedeas Bond A supersedeas bond can temporarily halt enforcement of the writ. This bond, filed with the county clerk or justice of the peace, preserves the status quo while the debtor seeks further legal remedies. This option is governed by Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 634 . Challenging the Execution Debtors can file a claim for wrongful execution in situations such as: The debt has already been paid Exempt property is being seized The levy is excessive Additionally, courts take extra care to protect property classified as a homestead under Texas Property Code § 41.002(c) . When only one spouse is responsible for the debt, Texas Family Code § 3.202(a) and related provisions provide guidance on levying against community or separate property. The Role of County Officials in Executing the Writ Once the writ is issued, its enforcement falls on county officials, typically a sheriff or constable. These officials must act in accordance with Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 34.072 , which requires them to execute the writ and report back to the court. They must: Give proper notice of the sale of seized property Ensure the proceeds are appropriately delivered to the creditor Avoid overstepping legal boundaries, such as seizing exempt property Failing to execute the writ properly can result in serious consequences, where a sheriff’s refusal to levy on a property initially listed as exempt (but later deemed abandoned) led to court action and damages awarded to the creditor. Preventing Fraudulent Transfers One challenge creditors face is when debtors attempt to hide or transfer assets to avoid collection. To address this, Texas follows the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act under Tex. Bus. & Comm. Code § 24.001 et seq .. This act provides legal remedies to creditors when a debtor’s transfer of assets is deemed fraudulent. Effect of a Defendant's Death on Writs of Execution Under Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 34.072 , the death of a defendant after a writ of execution is issued halts execution proceedings. However, any lien acquired from the writ's levy is still enforceable by the county court when paying off the deceased's debts. Why Proper Execution Of The Writ Is Crucial The rules for filing and serving a Writ of Execution are strict and detailed. Missteps, such as filing the writ in the wrong county, failing to serve the proper parties, or missing key deadlines, can lead to delays or even render the writ ineffective. Both creditors and debtors must ensure compliance with these rules to avoid unnecessary complications. For creditors, failure to properly enforce the writ could mean losing the opportunity to collect on a judgment. For debtors, not responding appropriately to a writ could result in the loss of valuable assets, even those that might have been exempt.
Understanding Venue Selection and Motions to Dismiss in Texas Civil Litigation
Wraparound Mortgages in Texas and The Pros and Cons of Seller Financing
Appeals Through JAMS Arbitration: A Structured Approach to Review
How One Texas Court is Halting the Corporate Transparency Act
How to Revive an Abandoned Trademark Application with the USPTO
The Wilson Legal Group are Dallas attorneys that specializes in Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, Trade Secrets, Complex Litigation, Business/Corporate Law, Family Law and Real Estate Law. At the Wilson Legal Group, our clients are our focus. Our philosophy is simple and straight-forward: Understand our clients' needs, hopes, and interests in order to help them flourish. Our staff strives to build strong relationships with our clients in order to appreciate their best interests and help them achieve their goals.
Have an idea for a blog? Click and request a blog and we will let you know when we post it!
Let's talk about your legal issue
Wilson Legal Group P.C.
d/b/a Wilson Whitaker Rynell
(972) 248-8080 (Dallas) MAIN OFFICE
(713) 830-2207 (Houston) Appointment Only
(512) 691-4100 (Austin) Appointment Only
For more information on how we can assist in your intellectual property, commercial litigation, divorce, or other personal needs, let us know how we can help you:
How Can We Help You?
Disclaimer:
This form does not establish an attorney-client relationship, and should only be used to contact the firm about scheduling a call or meeting. No confidential or sensitive information should be sent using this form.
We represent clients nationwide, including Dallas, Austin, Houston, and other Texas areas such as Fort Worth, Arlington, Carrollton, Plano, Allen, Lewisville, Flower Mound, Irving, Denton, McKinney, North Richland Hills, and all cities within Dallas County, Tarrant County, Collin County, and Denton County.
OFFICES
ABOUT
CONTACT
BLOG
Wilson Whitaker Rynell
16610 Dallas Parkway, Suite 1000
Dallas, Texas 75248
972-248-8080 (MAIN)
972-248-8088 (FAX)
info@wrrlegal.com (E-MAIL)