Dahms v. Legacy Plumbing, 5 N.W.3d 531

Scott Dahms hired Legacy Plumbing, LLC to perform a plumbing rough-in in a 1920s house; Legacy recommended replacing old piping but Dahms declined due to cost.
After completion, a leak was discovered; Legacy repaired it at no cost but water damage occurred.
Dahms filed a small claims suit to recover damages from the leak; Legacy removed the case to district court and obtained summary judgment.
The district court granted Legacy summary judgment, concluding no genuine issue of material fact existed as to the source or cause of the leak.
The Supreme Court reviewed the district court’s grant of summary judgment, focusing on whether a material factual dispute existed and whether the case was properly analyzed as a breach of contract claim.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Nature of Claim	Sought damages for Legacy’s conduct	No clear claim, but defended on contract	Claim is breach of contract
Genuine issue on source of leak	Leak arose from Legacy’s new PVC connection	Leak arose from old lead/Oakum joint	Genuine dispute exists; summary judgment reversed
Genuine issue on cause of leak	Leak caused by improper installation	Leak caused by old pipe failure	Genuine dispute exists; summary judgment reversed
Scope of damages (“incidentals”)	Damages not merely incidental if caused by Legacy’s work	Damages are contractual incidentals excluded by warranty	Factual dispute exists; cannot resolve on summary judgment

Bakke v. Magi-Touch Carpet One Floor & Home, Inc., 920 N.W.2d 726 (N.D. 2018) (establishes elements for breach of contract claim)
Swanson v. Larson, 967 N.W.2d 778 (N.D. 2021) (contract breach does not automatically give rise to a tort)
Miller v. Nodak Ins. Co., 987 N.W.2d 369 (N.D. 2023) (summary judgment standard)
Markgraf v. Welker, 873 N.W.2d 26 (N.D. 2015) (no weighing of evidence or credibility at summary judgment)
Hamilton v. Woll, 823 N.W.2d 754 (N.D. 2012) (summary judgment not for resolving factual disputes or conducting mini-trials)