Abbey Fry v. Andrew Blauvelt D/B/A Bluefield Trust Construction
2012 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 79
| Iowa | 2012Background
- The contract was an oral remodeling agreement; Bluefield began work in Sept 2008 at about $101,250 total.
- Fry later fired Bluefield in Jan 2009; S.R.S. Construction completed some work for Fry.
- Fry sued for breach, seeking costs to complete per original contract and delay damages.
- Pretrial order required exchange of exhibit lists seven days before trial; Fry added 183 exhibits the day before.
- Eight untimely exhibits included photographs of a water leak and millipede problem; Bluefield sought exclusion.
- During trial, Bluefield challenged admissibility; some testimony referenced in limine rulings and cross-examination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of untimely disclosed photographs | Fry; late disclosure was justified by new developments | Bluefield; late disclosure prejudiced defense and violated scheduling | District court did not abuse discretion; no substantial prejudice |
| Mistrial after Fry's in-court remarks | Fry’s remarks violated the motion in limine | Remedial admonitions were sufficient | No abuse; no mistrial warranted |
| Excessiveness of the jury award | Award supported by evidence of completion cost and delays | Damages inflated by passion/prejudice | Damages not flagrantly excessive; supported by substantial evidence |
| Directed verdict at close of Fry’s case | Sufficient evidence of breach under multiple theories | Insufficient or non-cumulative breach evidence | Substantial evidence supported breach; denial of directed verdict affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Estate of Long ex rel. Smith v. Broadlawns Med. Ctr., 656 N.W.2d 71 (Iowa 2002) (review of new-trial grounds; abuse of discretion standard)
- Hasselman v. Hasselman, 596 N.W.2d 541 (Iowa 1999) (directed verdict and sufficiency review)
- WSH Props., L.L.C. v. Daniels, 761 N.W.2d 45 (Iowa 2008) (excessive damages review; substantial evidence standard)
- State v. Thompkins, 318 N.W.2d 194 (Iowa 1982) (surprise evidence; prejudice considerations)
- Townsend v. Mid-Am. Pipeline Co., 168 N.W.2d 30 (Iowa 1969) (evidence assessment when evaluating passion/prejudice)
- Olson v. Nieman’s, Ltd., 579 N.W.2d 299 (Iowa 1998) (pretrial sanction and abuse-of-discretion review)