A. Salvati Masonry Inc. v. Michael Andreozzi
151 A.3d 745
| R.I. | 2017Background
- Salvati Masonry, subcontracted by general contractor Pariseault Builders on the Andreozzis’ home project, performed multiple masonry jobs; dispute arose over whether Salvati was paid for construction of the backyard patio.
- Pariseault’s written subcontract/bid to Salvati included an $88,845 masonry bid listing included and excluded items; parties disputed whether the patio pavers were within that scope.
- Pariseault paid Salvati for many items; Salvati contends the patio was omitted from that subcontract and billed separately to the Andreozzis, who allegedly did not pay $45,377.08 owed for extra and outstanding work.
- Testimony conflicted: Michael Andreozzi claimed Salvati admitted a bid error omitting the patio and that he paid Salvati for the patio as part of the $88,845; Keith Salvati denied the error and said Salvati billed the Andreozzis directly for the patio via a July 7, 2013 invoice.
- The trial justice found Salvati failed to prove which work was outside the original subcontract or the unpaid amount; judgment entered for the Andreozzis. Salvati appealed consolidated claims (mechanic’s lien; goods/services/book account).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Salvati proved it was owed for patio work outside the Pariseault subcontract | Salvati: performed patio work not covered by subcontract and was not paid; entitled to recovery (quantum meruit/book account/mechanic’s lien) | Andreozzi: patio was covered/paid under subcontract; or plaintiff failed to specify unpaid extra work | Court: Plaintiff failed to prove by preponderance what work was outside the subcontract or the unpaid amount; judgment for defendants |
| Whether trial justice erred in credibility/fact findings | Salvati: trial justice misconceived/overlooked evidence and wrongly credited defendants | Andreozzi: trial justice properly assessed credibility and evidence | Court: deference to trial justice’s credibility findings; no clear error |
| Whether plaintiff preserved arguments on quantum meruit, unjust enrichment, book account, mechanic’s lien | Salvati: raised these claims on appeal | Andreozzi: appellate arguments were undeveloped | Court: plaintiff’s appellate arguments were largely undeveloped and therefore waived |
| Standard of review for bench trial factual findings | Salvati: asks reversal of factual findings | Andreozzi: supports trial court deference | Court: applies Rule 52(a) deference; will not overturn unless clearly erroneous |
Key Cases Cited
- South County Post & Beam, Inc. v. McMahon, 116 A.3d 204 (R.I. 2015) (trial-justice factfinding in nonjury trials deserves deference)
- JPL Livery Services, Inc. v. Rhode Island Department of Administration, 88 A.3d 1134 (R.I. 2014) (standard for reviewing trial-justice findings and credibility)
- State v. Van Dongen, 132 A.3d 1070 (R.I. 2016) (respect accorded to credibility assessments by factfinder)
- State v. Erminelli, 991 A.2d 1064 (R.I. 2010) (same principle regarding witness demeanor and credibility)
- Gregoire v. Baird Properties, LLC, 138 A.3d 182 (R.I. 2016) (appellate reluctance to disturb credibility determinations)
- In re Jake G., 126 A.3d 450 (R.I. 2015) (issues inadequately briefed on appeal are deemed waived)
- Bucci v. Hurd Buick Pontiac GMC Truck, LLC, 85 A.3d 1160 (R.I. 2014) (failure to meaningfully develop appellate arguments results in waiver)