Refinery Holding Co. v. TRMI Holdings, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding a “chain of indemnification provisions” that could be used to assert a claim against the debtor allowed for “related to” jurisdiction
• noting that if a contract is ambiguous, a fact issue remains regarding the parties’ intent
• finding trial court's judgment was improper, and reversing so as to enjoin use of propertyin violation of covenants runningwith land
• applying Texas law and holding nonparty to contract could not defend against contribution claims for environmental cleanup by relying on contract provision governing allocation of same between parties to contract
• “Moreover, even when a covenant impacts the value of land, it must still affect the owner’s interest in the property or its use in order to be a real covenant.”
• Because Texas had not yet followed the Restatement's adoption of a list of policy considerations to replace the touch-and-concern requirement, the court did not address the policy arguments advanced by the parties.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).