James Fitz-Gerald, Jr. v. H. Winston Hull

Summary

The Texas Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Civil Appeals, holding that the trial court erred in granting an instructed verdict because the evidence raised a genuine issue of fact as to the existence of a constructive trust in favor of the respondents. The Court concluded that the oral joint‑venture agreement created a fiduciary relationship that permits the imposition of a constructive trust despite the Texas Trust Act’s prohibition on oral express trusts. The majority also held that the Texas Securities Act did not apply. Justice Smedley dissented, arguing that the oral agreement creates an express trust barred by the Trust Act, and Justice Garwood concurred, emphasizing the validity of parol trusts.