A Texas appellate court has modified a lower court's injunction and attorney's fees ruling in the case of Firmus Centro, LLC v. ATX Self-Storage, LLC. The decision, issued on August 12, 2026, affects the rights of two commercial property owners involved in a dispute over an easement agreement. The ruling clarifies the responsibilities of both parties regarding access to a shared driveway.
The case originated from a conflict between Firmus Centro, LLC, the appellant, and ATX Self-Storage, LLC, the appellee, concerning an easement agreement that governs access to a driveway shared by their properties. The dispute began when Firmus accused ATX of obstructing vehicular access, which led to the first appeal. In that appeal, the Texas Court of Appeals found that the trial court had abused its discretion by failing to grant Firmus a permanent injunction to prevent further obstruction.
After the first ruling, the trial court was instructed to consider Firmus’s request for a permanent injunction and to determine attorney's fees. Upon remand, the trial court issued an amended final judgment that included a permanent injunction against ATX, prohibiting it from interfering with Firmus’s rights to access the driveway. However, the trial court also awarded ATX substantial attorney's fees, which Firmus contested in the current appeal.
The court ruled that the trial court had indeed abused its discretion in several aspects of its amended judgment. The appellate court modified the injunction to remove a clause that required Firmus to prove interference beyond a reasonable doubt, a standard typically reserved for criminal cases. The court stated, "The failure to do so was an abuse of discretion." This modification means that the burden of proof for finding ATX in contempt of the injunction is now lower, making it easier for Firmus to enforce its rights.
Additionally, the appellate court addressed the issue of attorney's fees awarded to ATX. The court had previously determined that Firmus was the prevailing party in the case and had instructed the trial court to award attorney's fees to Firmus, not ATX. The appellate court found that the trial court's decision to award ATX $273,000 in attorney's fees contradicted its earlier ruling. The court stated, "The trial court went beyond our mandate and therefore, abused its discretion." As a result, the court deleted the award of attorney's fees to ATX and affirmed the award of $79,000 in attorney's fees to Firmus.
This ruling is significant as it clarifies the legal standards for injunctions in Texas and reinforces the importance of adhering to appellate court mandates. The decision impacts both Firmus and ATX, as it alters their legal obligations and rights regarding the easement agreement. The court's ruling sets a precedent for future cases involving similar disputes over easement rights and the enforcement of injunctions.
Looking ahead, it is unclear whether ATX will appeal this decision. The court has already denied a petition from ATX regarding the attorney's fees issue in the Texas Supreme Court. As of now, the case stands with the modified injunction and the attorney's fees awarded to Firmus, potentially influencing how similar cases are handled in the future.