Houston Jury Awards $5,000 in Contract Breach Dispute
One company entered into an agreement with another company to provide security services. The first company alleged that the second company received payment but failed to pay the amounts due under their agreement. The first company filed a complaint seeking damages, attorney's fees, and costs. After a trial, a jury found that the second company had breached the contract and awarded damages and attorney's fees to the first company. A final judgment was entered in favor of the first company.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $5,000
- County
- Harris County, TX
- Resolved
- 2021
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Other
- Accident Type
- Other
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
A security services joint venture agreement was established on March 16, 2015, between Security Details International LLC and Investigation and Polygraph Services LLC to serve Houstonian Campus, LLC. Under the agreement, Investigation and Polygraph Services was to pay Security Details International 50% of billed coordination and management fees. Security Details International alleged that Investigation and Polygraph Services received payments but failed to disburse the agreed sums despite the plaintiff fulfilling its obligations.
Security Details International filed a complaint on August 22, 2016, seeking $4,228 in damages, plus attorney's fees and costs. The defendant filed a general denial. The case proceeded through several continuances. Following a jury trial on April 17, 2019, the jury found that the defendant had materially breached the contract and that the plaintiff was entitled to damages and attorney's fees.
On April 24, 2019, the court entered a final judgment in favor of Security Details International, awarding $2,500 in damages and $2,500 in attorney's fees, for a total of $5,000. Two nonparties were found jointly and severally liable for $4,000 as sureties on an appeal bond. The court also awarded $152 in court costs and post-judgment interest. Funds were later deposited into the court registry, and on October 2, 2020, the plaintiff received $5,523.23. The parties subsequently reached a separate agreement to resolve a dispute over the judgment amount, which included a further deposit into the court registry.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome is within expected ranges
This score is calculated by analyzing injury type, accident details, geographic location, temporal trends, and comparing against 2,000+ similar cases in our database.
Want results like this for your case?
Share your situation and we'll connect you with experienced motor vehicle accident attorneys who have handled cases like this in Harris County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
A case was filed in Texas by the plaintiffs against an individual defendant and defendant Rockwell Collins, Inc. Few details were available regarding the incident that led to the lawsuit or the specific legal claims asserted. The record indicated the case concluded on June 12, 2015. No further information was provided regarding the arguments of each side, the outcome, or the reasons for the verdict or judgment.
A plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit in Dallas County, Texas, alleging that on April 2, 2012, a defendant negligently operated a vehicle. The plaintiff claimed the defendant failed to yield while making a turn, causing a collision with the plaintiff's car. The plaintiff alleged injuries from the incident. The lawsuit was filed on April 1, 2014, in the District Court, 14th District Court, Dallas County, Texas. The parties later reached a settlement agreement on June 26, 2015. Under the terms, the plaintiff accepted $7,000 in full settlement of all claims. On July 9, 2015, the court entered an agreed order dismissing the case with prejudice based on the parties' joint motion.
In October 2011, a plaintiff was driving a compact car eastbound on Interstate 10 in Harris County, Texas. While moving to the outside shoulder to yield to an approaching fire truck, the plaintiff's vehicle struck a rectangular hole in the pavement, causing a right front tire blowout. The hole, approximately two feet long and several inches deep, had resulted from the removal of a traffic-counting device and had not been refilled. The plaintiff alleged a shoulder injury. The plaintiff filed a premises liability lawsuit against the Texas Department of Transportation, alleging the hole constituted an unreasonably dangerous "special defect" that the agency knew or should have known about. The court ruled that the hole was a special defect as a matter of law. The defendant denied knowledge of the condition and contended that the plaintiff was negligent for failing to keep a proper lookout. The plaintiff claimed the incident aggravated a pre-existing partial rotator cuff tear, while the defense argued the injury was entirely pre-existing and noted a six-month gap in the plaintiff's treatment history. After a two-day trial, a jury found the Texas Department of Transportation negligent and awarded the plaintiff $9,973. The jury's finding of negligence was based on the determination that the defendant "knew or should have known" of the dangerous condition. The jury did not find the defendant negligent based on "actual knowledge," nor did it find the plaintiff comparatively negligent. The award included damages for past medical costs, past physical impairment, past lost earning capacity, and past physical pain.
In Tarrant County, a plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging negligence following a motor vehicle accident. The plaintiff claimed to have sustained bodily injuries, specifically soft tissue damage to the neck and back, as a result of the incident. A jury heard the case and delivered an 11-1 verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The jury found the defendant negligent and awarded damages totaling $2,226. This amount included $500 for past physical pain and mental anguish, and $1,726 for past medical care.
A negligence case was filed following a motor vehicle incident that involved a commercial vehicle. The plaintiff brought the action against the defendant. A defense expert specializing in areas such as forensic auditing and transportation safety was involved in the proceedings. The parties reached a settlement agreement, concluding the case on June 30, 2015.