Broadkill Beach Builders, LLC v. Frampton, S23L-09-009 RHR

The Framptons hired Broadkill Beach Builders, LLC to perform repairs on their rental property under a written time-and-materials contract with a 20% management fee.
The Framptons received and paid a series of invoices, none of which included the 20% management fee, until a final invoice with the fee was submitted.
The Framptons refused to pay the final 20% fee, arguing mistaken belief it was already included and that they were overcharged.
Broadkill sued the Framptons for breach of contract and unjust enrichment; the Framptons counterclaimed for breach of contract, consumer fraud, and deceptive trade practices.
Broadkill moved for summary judgment and to exclude a late expert report; the Framptons relied on this report to support their claims of overbilling.
The court granted summary judgment to Broadkill, found the Framptons’ counterclaims meritless and at least partially barred by the voluntary payment doctrine, and found the motion in limine moot.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did Frampton breach contract by not paying 20% fee?	Framptons failed to pay agreed fee; clear breach.	Fee shouldn’t apply; overbilled and overcharged.	Breach; Broadkill wins.
Is overbilling a breach of contract?	No legal basis; bill amount not contract breach.	High price and lack of detail show breach.	Not a breach.
Entitlement to detailed accounting?	No contractual or fiduciary right to accounting.	Failure to provide accounting is breach.	Not entitled to accounting
Consumer fraud or deception?	No false statement or concealment; fee was disclosed.	Concealed fee, misrepresented costs, general overcharging.	No fraud or deception.
DTPA standing (deceptive trade practices act)?	DTPA only covers business competitors, not consumers.	Framptons’ rental ownership gives standing under DTPA.	No standing for consumer.
Voluntary payment doctrine applicability?	Bars claims for previously paid invoices.	Didn’t have full knowledge when paying.	Doctrine bars recovery.
Admissibility/effect of Cogent Report?	No genuine dispute of fact; report is moot.	Report shows overbilling and is relevant to their claim.	Report is moot.

Nemec v. Shrader, 991 A.2d 1120 (Del. 2010) (contract law enforces both good and bad bargains and will not rewrite contracts based on buyer's remorse)
Grand Ventures Inc. v. Whaley, 632 A.2d 63 (Del. 1993) (Delaware Deceptive Trade Practices Act only covers business competitors, not consumer transactions)