 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Verdicts / Settlements - DefendantsMichael Ronald Robles dba Robles Concrete v. Environmental Site Development
CASE NO.: V-002954-6VERDICT DATE: August 30, 1993
CASE TYPE: Breach of Contract RESULT: $79,188 to Defendant/CrossComplainant, Environmental Site Development COURT: Alameda County Superior Court, Hayward JUDGE: William L. Dunbar SUMMARY: Unlicensed contractor seeks payment for his substandard work; $79,188 damages plus attorney's fees/costs DEFENDANT ATTORNEY: Negele, Knopfler , et al., By: Alexander Robertson IV Universal City DEMAND: by CrossComplainant Environment: $79,188 originally, changed to $25,000 up front and balance over 36 months at MSC; CrossComplainant's attorney asked the Court for $79,188 plus attorney's fees/costs. FactsIn September, 1989 Defendant was hired as a subcontractor to build the Robert Livermore Community Park and, in turn, hired Plaintiff Robles to install the concrete work for the project. In the subcontract with Defendant, Robles represented that he was a licensed contractor and listed his contractor's license number. However, unbeknownst to Defendant at the time, Robles' license had expired two years earlier. After performing a portion of his subcontract and installing a substantial amount of concrete on the project, the owner, Livermore area Recreation and Park District and their architect, rejected Robles' work when the concrete cracked badly after curing. Despite repeated demands to replace the defective concrete, Robles refused to perform repairs and was eventually replaced by another contractor. In June, 1991, Robles filed a verified complaint against Environmental and others, seeking recovery of the unpaid balance on his subcontract and alleging defamation against the Park District's architect for rejecting his concrete work. Plaintiff: Per CrosscomplainantThat Robles breached his subcontract by failing to hold valid contractor's license, deviated from the plans and specifications, installed defective concrete, failed to correct his defective work pursuant to an express guaranty clause in his subcontract and failed to hold Environmental harmless from the owner's claims arising from his defective work pursuant to an express indemnity clause in his subcontract. Defendant: Per CrosscomplainantContended that Robles failure to renew his contractor's license over a threeyear period was a clerical error made by the Contractor's State License Board; that upon learning of this fact, he immediately renewed his license. Additionally Robles contended that the concrete cracked due to a poor mix design and specification by the District's architect. Offerby CrossDefendant Robles: $25,000 Verdict$79,188 against Plaintiff/CrossDefendant plus attorney's fees/costs. Robles' complaint was dismissed prior to trial because of his lack of a valid contractor's license at the time he performed the work. Therefore, only Environmental's crosscomplaint against Robles went to trial. NotesPlaintiff concrete contractor appeared in pro per. Trial Time2 days See Neubauer's Confidential Report for Attorneys No.: 4470 |