Appeal Court Decision 2

Posted by tim scott on July 12th, 2021

Appeal Court Decision

Plaintiff architect and defendant client each sought review of a judgment from the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (California), which awarded the architect a small sum in his action to recover damages for the client's breach of a contract of employment. The architect also challenged the denial of his motion for a new trial.

Overview: corporate attorneys

The architect and the client entered into negotiations regarding the erection and construction of an opera house and an additional building. An agreement was reached by which the client agreed to pay the architect five percent of the cost of construction, as well as the architect's traveling expenses. When the client refused to carry out the terms of the agreement or pay the architect, the architect filed a breach of contract action against the client and sought $ 15,000 in damages. The trial court found that the parties had entered into a contract, and that the architect had offered to perform, but that at the time he had not obtained a certificate from the State board of architecture, as required by the act of March 23, 1901, 1901 Cal. Stat. 212. The trial court found that the client breached the contract, but that the damages amounted to only $ 700. The architect's motion for a new trial was denied, and both he and the client sought review. The court determined that there was sufficient evidence supporting the findings regarding the contract and the breach. The court also determined that there was insufficient evidence to show an indebtedness to the architect of $ 15,000.

Outcome

The court affirmed the trial court's judgment in favor of the architect, the amount of damages awarded, and the denial of a new trial.