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
Failure to Pay

Helen Turley, John Wetlaufer v. Bryant Family Vineyard Ltd.

Published: Aug. 3, 2004 | Result Date: Mar. 11, 2004 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 26193736 Verdict –  $255,421

Judge

Raymond A. Guadagni

Court

Napa Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Philip J. Terry


Defendant

John R. Musgrave

Harry W. Wellford Jr.


Facts

The plaintiff, HMT & Associates headed by Helen Turley, was engaged by defendant Bryant Family Vineyards Ltd., to provide consulting services regarding defendant's vineyard and winemaking operations in Napa Valley. Helen Turley had worked for Bryant Family Vineyard Ltd. since 1993. The plaintiff claimed that on Dec. 28, 2001, the parties entered into an oral agreement whereby the existing relationship for consulting winemaking services was extended for a fixed term of three years at $250,000 per year. The defendant denied that a fixed term was agreed to and that the relationship remained terminable at will with only a change as to the rate of compensation. Subsequently, a disagreement arose between the parties as to the operational and financial control and authority of plaintiff over defendant's operations. HMT asserted by letter dated Sep. 30, 2002, that the relationship should terminate if defendant did not recognize this authority and control. On Oct. 16, 2002, the defendant wrote a letter to HMT stating that plaintiff's assertions were a breach of an essential term of the understanding between the parties, thereby terminating the relationship. HMT sued Bryant Family Vineyards Ltd. alleging breach of contract contending that its agreement still had two years and two months remaining. Bryant Family Vineyard contended there had never been an agreement for a three-year term, but if there was such a contract, plaintiff's actions amounted to a breach excusing Bryant Family Vineyard from any performance.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiffs demanded $250,000.

Damages

The plaintiffs claimed damages of $555,421 for the remainder of the contract still owed by Bryant Family Vineyard.

Result

The jury found for HMT on the breach of contract but found that HMT had failed to mitigate its damages. The verdict after reduction for mitigation was $255,421.

Deliberation

seven hours

Poll

10-2

Length

12 days


#81340

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

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