This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Contracts
Breach of Contract
Fraud

Lawrence Hubbs, Linda Hubbs v. James Howard Scott, D.B.A. Jamestown Fix 'Em Up

Published: Sep. 29, 2007 | Result Date: May 14, 2007 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: CIV245005 Settlement –  $42,480

Court

Ventura Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Christina S. Stokholm


Defendant

Michael P. Ehline
(Ehline Law Firm PC)


Facts

In July 2005, plaintiffs Lawrence and Linda Hubbs hired defendant James Scott to renovate their house for $44,000. When it rained that following October, plaintiffs' roof leaked and their home was flooded. At the time, defendant did not have liability insurance. The plaintiffs sued for breach of contract, fraud, and infliction of emotional distress. The defendant filed a countersuit for breach of contract. The emotional distress claim was dismissed. The defendant filed a countersuit for the amount he claimed he was owed under the contract.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiffs contended that the defendant misrepresented himself, falsely stating he had liability and worker's compensation insurance. He also misrepresented his skills. Further, even though he was responsible for the roof collapse, he did not repair the damage.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant contended that a previous contractor was responsible for the damage to the roof. Further, prior wiring damage caused by another contractor modified the scope of the project. Also, defendant left the project because he was not allowed to complete the job. The plaintiffs' lawsuit against him therefore constituted harassment.

Damages

The plaintiffs claimed they paid defendant almost $31,000, and a second contractor $29,500 to complete defendant's job and fix his errors. They also sought punitive damages.

Result

Pursuant to the settlement reached by the parties, plaintiffs were required to drop their fraud allegations and defendant was to pay $42,479.


#120745

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390