Facts

Michael DeMotte and Ben Ramos entered into an agreement for Ramos's auto body shop to perform the needed repairs on DeMotte's vehicle. DeMotte thereafter claimed that Ramos breached the agreement due to issues over providing a written preliminary estimate and failing to perform the promised repairs, prompting DeMotte to sue Ramos, dba Schatz & Krum Collision Specialist, for breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, fraud, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff contended that Defendant's failure to give a written preliminary estimate violated Business & Professions Code. Plaintiff also contended that Defendant left a series of 16 harassing and threatening voice mail messages on his cell phone, despite knowing that he was susceptible to emotional distress.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant contended that Plaintiff signed an authorization to repair incorporating the USAA estimate and Defendant was actively performing the repairs to a workmanlike standard until Plaintiff was allowed to take his car from the shop over the weekend to avoid incurring rental car expenses and then prevented Defendant from completing the repairs by thereafter refusing to return the car to the shop.

Defendant further contended the lack of breach by Defendant was confirmed by the testimony of Bureau of Automotive Repair investigator Jeffrey Hammer that when he went to Schatz & Krum he found that replacement molding and trim for Plaintiff's car was sitting on Ben Ramos' desk, still in the Lexus dealer plastic wrap, waiting for Plaintiff to return the car and allow completion of the repairs.

Defendant further contended that to the extent there was any verbal confrontation that occurred involving Plaintiff and employees of Schatz & Krum, Plaintiff was the aggressor at all times. Finally, Defendant contended that the phone messages left by Ben Ramos for Plaintiff were all designed to have him return the car for completion of repairs and were never intended as any kind of threat.

Damages

DeMotte sought $202,400 in total damages, which included $1,200 in property damage for each of the breach of contract and fraud concealment claims, $100,000 in general damages, and $100,000 on the IIED claim.

Result

The jury rendered a verdict for the defense.

Other Information

Defendants memorandum of costs totaling $15,515 went unopposed.

Deliberation

two hours.

Length

four days