Ed Lally & Associates, Inc. v. DSBNC, LLC
145 Conn. App. 718
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- From 2003 plaintiff Ed Lally & Associates provided engineering/surveying for a proposed subdivision involving properties at 30 and 33 Moosehom Road; original engagement was with D.H. Williams, Inc. and a developer (Shibley).
- Over time Williams, Parks, Moosehom Road LLC and later DSBNC, LLC became involved; title transfers occurred between entities during the project period (2005–2009).
- Plaintiff continued work and submitted a March 31, 2009 invoice and a reconciled July 2009 invoice showing $44,570.50 due; plaintiff filed mechanic’s liens for that amount on both properties and sued to foreclose the liens and for breach of contract and quantum meruit.
- Trial court (court trial) awarded plaintiff foreclosure of both mechanic’s liens, breach of contract judgment against Moosehom, LLC and Parks, quantum meruit recovery against defendants, and prejudgment interest; law days were set and this appeal followed.
- Defendants raised multiple defenses and counterclaims and repeatedly amended pleadings; the trial court struck several amended pleadings for procedural noncompliance and ultimately disallowed further late amendments on the grounds of prejudice and delay.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject-matter jurisdiction re: mechanic’s liens | Lally: liens valid; court competent to adjudicate foreclosure | Defendants: liens defective (wrong property, improper tacking, false statements, after-acquired property, filed late) and thus court lacked jurisdiction | Court: jurisdiction not defeated; defects were merits/special-defense issues not jurisdictional and were not timely raised at trial, so claim not reviewed on appeal |
| Damages for breach of contract | Lally: invoices, time slips, reconciliation, letter explanations and exhibit 53 support $44,570.50 with reasonable certainty | Defendants: exhibit 53 insufficient and speculative; proof inadequate | Court: ample evidence (invoices, time slips, reconciliation, testimony) supported damages; finding not clearly erroneous |
| Quantum meruit recovery alongside contract claim | Plaintiff: alternative recovery; value equals contract award ($44,570.50) | Defendants: cannot recover under both contract and quantum meruit for same subject matter | Court: awarding both was error as to parties bound by express contract (Moosehom, Parks, D.H. Williams) but harmless (no double recovery); quantum meruit valid as to DSBNC, LLC based on implied contract/facts |
| Amendments / motions to strike pleadings | Plaintiff: moved to strike deficient special defenses/counterclaims and objected to untimely/amended pleadings to prevent delay | Defendants: pleadings were legally sufficient and plaintiff knew issues; procedural irregularities excused | Court: defendants waived challenge to earlier strike by filing an amended pleading; trial court did not abuse discretion in denying late fourth amended pleadings due to delay/prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Louis Gherlone Excavating, Inc. v. McLean Construction Co., 88 Conn. App. 775 (discusses special defenses to foreclosure and raising validity issues)
- Amodio v. Amodio, 247 Conn. 724 (distinguishes subject-matter jurisdiction from erroneous exercise of jurisdiction)
- Artman v. Artman, 111 Conn. 124 (historical authority on jurisdiction vs. error in exercise of jurisdiction)
- Duplissie v. Devino, 96 Conn. App. 673 (damage estimation standard: reasonable certainty)
- David M. Somers & Associates, P.C. v. Busch, 283 Conn. 396 (quantum meruit vs. contract recovery; use of plenary review for equitable doctrines)
- 300 State, LLC v. Hanafin, 140 Conn. App. 327 (quantum meruit/unjust enrichment principles; no recovery under quantum meruit where express contract governs)
- Pamoff v. Mooney, 132 Conn. App. 512 (quantum meruit requires reasonable value when implied contract exists)
- Noonan v. Noonan, 122 Conn. App. 184 (issue-preservation: appellate review requires issues raised and ruled on at trial)
- Desrosiers v. Henne, 283 Conn. 361 (harmless error and harmfulness standard for excluded evidence)
- Caltabiano v. L & L Real Estate Holdings II, LLC, 128 Conn. App. 84 (amending after motion to strike operates as waiver of appeal of the strike)