HOUSTON – An appeals court ruled that a general manager for a company could not personally be held liable to pay a settlement when the corporation he worked for failed to pay it.
The Court of Appeals for the 1st District of Texas panel ruled June 12 that Securatech was to pay a settlement and not its general manager.
Securatech Solutions failed to pay the amount agreed upon from a mediated settlement and Southcross Security then attempted to enforce the judgment on Jory Odom, the general manager of Securatech, according to the June 12 opinion.
The panel consisted of Justices Evelyn Keyes, Jane Bland and Michael C. Massengale. Bland authored the opinion.
"We hold that Odom did not breach the agreement because the agreement required the corporation to pay the funds, not Odom," Bland wrote. "We therefore reverse the trial court's judgment against Odom individually, render judgment that Southcross Security Inc. take nothing as to Odom and affirm the judgment against the corporation."
The lawsuit against Securatech and Odom was filed in the 125th District Court of Harris County in 2015.
The parties later settled the claims and Securatech agreed to pay $25,000 to Southcross. When Securatech failed to pay the settlement, Southcross attempted to enforce the settlement against Odom, arguing that he and Securatech were both liable for the settlement.
Odom then argued that he was not responsible for the settlement individually and that it was Securatech's responsibility, however, the trial court entered the final judgment order against both.
Odom then appealed, arguing that he was not responsible and that the trial court was wrong in ruling that he had any obligation to pay the settlement since Southcross entered into the settlement with Securatech and not him.
Bland wrote that when looking at the mediated settlement agreement, it clearly states that Securatech is entitled to pay the settlement and that Odom is not listed as a party obligated to make any payment on the settlement.
"To hold Odom jointly and severally liable, as Southcross advocates, we would have to rewrite the agreement’s payment provision to include Odom, when he is not included," Bland wrote.
Court of Appeals for the 1st District of Texas case number 01-17-00915