Texas Business Court Decision – October 7, 2025

No. 24-BC11A-0024  Isaac Arnold, Jr., et al. v. Blue Ridge Landfill TX, LP, etc. (11th Div., Judge Sharp)

Civil case – Breach of Contract/Denial of Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.  Under the parties’ contract, Blue Ridge Landfill paid plaintiffs royalties for revenue it generated on waste disposed at the landfill; decades after the contract’s execution, Blue Ridge expanded its landfill; while it initially paid plaintiffs royalties on waste deposited at both the original property and the new tract, it later notified plaintiffs they would no longer receive royalties for waste deposited on the new tract. Plaintiffs brought this suit for breach of contract and declaratory judgment; Blue Ridge moves for summary judgment on both counts.

Held: Under the contract, plaintiffs are entitled to royalties for final disposal of solid waste in the sanitary landfill operated “on the Property.” Plaintiffs have presented evidence that waste deposited on the new tract “is, indeed, disposed of in the landfill operating on the [original] Property;”  the landfill is operated under one permit and performs operations on the original property, whether it ultimately deposits the waste on the original or new property; for example, the waste deposited on the new tract enters through the original property, where the only entry gate and scalehouse are located, all waste is weighed and pricing assessed on the original property, and defendant operates across both tracts of land as a single business enterprise; to conclude that the waste accepted by the landfill does not generate “rate revenue” on which royalties are calculated simply because the waste is deposited on the new tract, the court would have to rewrite the  the contract, which it cannot do; thus defendant has failed to conclusively disprove that the waste it deposits on the new tract does not generate “rate revenue” as that phrase applies to the royalties owed plaintiffs, and it is not entitled to summary judgment.