Curtis Hole Drilling Co. v. Saturn Electric Inc., et al.
Published: Jul. 30, 2002 | Result Date: Jan. 22, 2002 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: IC763387 – $81,190
Judge
Court
San Diego Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Facts
The plaintiff, a drilling subcontractor, was hired by the defendant, general contractor Saturn Electric, to drill holes
for a million-dollar project in Balboa Park, San Diego.
During the course of drilling, the plaintiff, Curtis Hole Drilling Co., encountered physical obstructions in the
ground that caused substantial difficulties and necessitated extra work be done -- work which, according to the
plaintiff, they had not been contracted to do. The plaintiff and defendant agreed that a claim would be
submitted to the city of San Diego.
According to the defendant, Curtis Hole Drilling would be paid for the extra work if the claim was paid but
that the plaintiff should continue drilling at their own peril.
According to the plaintiff, Saturn Electric told them to go ahead and continue work and would be compensated
for their work.
The plaintiff was never paid.
The plaintiff alleged breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation and violation of the
prompt pay statute, Business and Professions Code Section 7108.5.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff demanded $13,910 before the suit was filed, according to the plaintiff. The defendant declined to submit an offer.
Damages
The plaintiff alleged damages of $15,737 plus attorney fees and costs.
Result
During the course of the trial, the jury found that Curtis Hole Drilling Co. had possessed the proper license to perform services outlined in the plaintiff's contract with the defendant. According to the Special Jury Verdict, the plaintiff's license lapsed during the execution of the services outlined in the contract, but that the plaintiff did act reasonably and did not know or should have reasonably known that it was not licensed. The jury also found that there was a valid contract between the plaintiff and Saturn Electric and that the defendant failed to perform its part of the contract. The jury stated that Saturn's failure to perform the contract was unexcused. Curtis Hole Drilling had rendered its services at Saturn Electric's request, according to the jury, and reasonably believed that it would be paid for services they performed. The jury also found that Saturn Electric had received the plaintiff's bill and invoices showing the balance owed and had agreed with the plaintiff's statement of balance due. The jury found that Saturn Electric did make false representations to the plaintiff without any reasonable belief that the representation was true. These representations were made with the intent to induce the plaintiff to rely on it and the plaintiff did justifiably rely on it, according to the jury, incurring damages because of the defendant's fraudulent representation. Saturn Electric engaged in conduct for the purpose of denying the plaintiff the benefits of the contract, according to the jury. The plaintiff sustained damages from Saturn Electric's breach of good faith. The jury also found that Saturn Electric had wrongfully withheld $14,095 from the plaintiff and had violated Business and Professions Code 7108.5
Other Information
The jury awarded $15,737 and $61,623 in attorney's fees and $3,698 in costs. According to the defendant, the case will probably be appealed. According to the plaintiff's attorney, the case has already settled.
Deliberation
five hours
Poll
12-0
Length
four days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390