Legacy Builders, LLC, a Wyoming Limited Liability Company and Joe Seneshale, an individual, 2014 WY 103

Brittany and Brian Andrews contracted with Legacy Builders to construct and obtain a single-family home in Rock Springs, Wyoming, with numerous defects discovered post-purchase.
Legacy conducted soils tests showing expansive soils; engineer recommended precautions but Legacy did not share the report with the Andrews.
Andrews notified Legacy of twenty-seven defects in 2006; Legacy failed to correct them, and repairs continued to be needed over years.
Expert testimony at trial showed potential repairs including foundation stabilization with helical piers; Andrews' expert estimated higher costs than Legacy's.
Trial court awarded 319,302 in damages based on cost of repairs (foundation stabilization, unworkmanlike construction, and temporary housing).
On appeal, Legacy challenged the measure of damages, reliance on future-damage estimates, and the finding that expansive soils caused damage; the court affirmed but remanded to correct the damage amount to 189,498.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
What damages measure applies when cost of repairs may exceed loss in value?	Andrews argues cost of repair is appropriate; diminution in value not proven.	Legacy argues diminution in value should govern where damages are disproportionate.	Generally the lesser of cost of repairs or diminution in value governs; if diminution evidence is absent, cost of repairs may apply.
Did the court err in relying on future-cost estimates for items not yet damaged and in attributing damage to expansive soils?	Andrews substantiated future repairs and causal link to expansive soils; evidence supports damages.	Legacy argues future damages should be limited to currently damaged items; soils issue contested.	Court did not err in relying on credible future-repair evidence, but reduced recoverable future-damage by excluding items (roof/trusses) not reasonably foreseeable.

City of Kemmerer v. Wagner, 866 P.2d 1283 (Wyo. 1993) (lower of cost of repairs or diminution in value; extensive damage may warrant market-value measure)
Ely v. Kirk, 707 P.2d 706 (Wyo. 1985) (damages for real property inversely related to repair vs. value loss)
Belle Fourche Pipeline Co. v. Elmore Livestock Co., 669 P.2d 505 (Wyo. 1983) (damage measurement framework in property disputes)
Tavares v. Horstman, 542 P.2d 1275 (Wyo. 1975) (implied warranty damages framework for new homes)
Graham v. State, 16 P.3d 712 (Wyo. 2001) (Restatement damages approach for contract cases; reference on §348)