Five months later Ms. Fisher sued Rondo, alleging breach of contract (among other claims) and demanding a full refund of her deposit, plus amounts paid to a subsequent pool contractor, and punitive damages (which are usually awarded only when a party acts with an "evil mind").
Rondo, represented by Mike Thal, filed a counterclaim against Ms. Fisher, alleging that she wrongfully terminated the contract.
After a six-day trial in Maricopa County Superior Court, the jury found against Ms. Fisher on all of her claims and found in favor of Rondo on its counterclaim. The court awarded Rondo $310,351, including $286,048 in attorney's fees - in a case that, at its core, was over a $17,723 deposit plus the costs of finishing the project.
Appeal Rejected.
Ms. Fisher appealed, alleging that the trial judge erred by instructing the jurors that they could consider whether Rondo was ready, willing and able to rectify Fisher's complaints. Mike Thal and George King represented Rondo at the Arizona Court of Appeals, which rejected Ms. Fisher's appeal and upheld the award to Rondo.
Keys to Victory.
A vital asset in Rondo's trial court victory was their ability to produce emails and texts between Rondo and Ms. Fisher that documented (a) Rondo's multiple offers to fix the problem and (b) Ms. Fisher's termination of the contract without reasonably allowing Rondo to do so.
Contract Addition.
Also in each case, the contractor could have been spared the ordeal of a lawsuit if it had included in its contract a clause that required the owner, before being permitted to terminate the contract, to allow a defined period of time for the contractor to evaluate and cure any workmanship issues.
Adding this simple clause helps keep the issue out of the Court's hands and makes clear that you are entitled to an opportunity to cure.
