Nation Electrical Contracting, LLC v. St. Dimitrie Romanian Orthodox Church
2013 Conn. App. LEXIS 403
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- St. Dimitrie contracted with Primrose as general contractor for church construction; Primrose subcontracted electrical work to Nation Electrical for ~$109,795. Nation had no contract with St. Dimitrie.
- Nation submitted progress invoices (Oct/Nov 2007) that Primrose invoiced to St. Dimitrie; those payments were made and Nation was paid for those items.
- Nation submitted a final invoice (Jan 1, 2008) seeking $40,000 (net $34,900). Primrose abandoned the project Feb 18, 2008; Primrose’s Feb 23, 2008 final billing to St. Dimitrie included Nation’s invoice. St. Dimitrie did not pay Primrose or Nation on that final invoice.
- Primrose and several subcontractors filed mechanic’s liens; Judge Levin later discharged Primrose’s lien, finding Primrose’s work deficient, the owner spent large sums to complete/repair the project, and there was no lienable fund. Judge Levin did not find that Nation had been paid.
- Trial court (Judge Gilardi) found unjust enrichment: St. Dimitrie received $34,900 in benefit from Nation, did not pay Nation, and Nation was prejudiced; awarded $34,900 plus prejudgment interest from Feb 23, 2008. St. Dimitrie appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether St. Dimitrie was liable to Nation on unjust enrichment | Nation: it provided $34,900 in labor/materials, St. Dimitrie retained the benefit and did not pay, so restitution is required | St. Dimitrie: Judge Levin found no balance owing to Primrose; owner paid all sums due to Primrose (which would include Nation), so owner cannot be unjustly enriched or made to pay twice | Court: Affirmed unjust enrichment — record showed St. Dimitrie did not pay Primrose/Nation on final invoice; Levin’s lien ruling was about lienability, not payment to subcontractors; factual finding not clearly erroneous |
| Whether prejudgment interest under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 37-3a can be awarded on an unjust enrichment claim | Nation: wrongful detention of money makes § 37-3a applicable; interest justified from invoice date | St. Dimitrie: § 37-3a not applicable to unjust enrichment recovery | Court: § 37-3a can apply; award proper where money was payable and wrongfully detained; no abuse of discretion in awarding interest from invoice date |
| Whether Judge Levin’s discharge of Primrose’s lien precluded Nation’s claim | Nation: Levin’s findings do not show Nation was paid; lien discharge does not bar restitution claim against owner | St. Dimitrie: Levin’s finding “no balance owing” means owner paid Primrose, so owner not unjustly enriched | Court: Levin ruled only no lienable fund; did not find payment to Primrose for final invoice or payment to Nation; defendant’s reading was incorrect |
| Whether alternative restitution theories (quantum meruit) remain unresolved | Nation: pursued unjust enrichment and abandoned quantum meruit posttrial; recovery only requires one restitution theory | St. Dimitrie: trial court omitted quantum meruit and judgment might be partial | Court: Plaintiff abandoned quantum meruit; recovery under one restitutionary theory moots need to address the other |
Key Cases Cited
- Providence Electric Co. v. Sutton Place, Inc., 161 Conn. 242 (1971) (property owner who pays general contractor in full ordinarily not unjustly enriched by subcontractor’s work)
- Garwood & Sons Construction Co. v. Centos Associates Ltd. Partnership, 8 Conn. App. 185 (1986) (unjust enrichment elements and restitutionary principles in construction context)
- New Hartford v. Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority, 291 Conn. 433 (2009) (elements required to recover for unjust enrichment)
- Sosin v. Sosin, 300 Conn. 205 (2011) (standards for awarding prejudgment interest under § 37-3a)
- Foley v. Huntington Co., 42 Conn. App. 712 (1996) (no right to interest absent statutory basis)
- Seaman v. Climate Control Corp., 181 Conn. 592 (1980) (mechanic’s lien law: limits on lien and owner credits for payments and reasonable completion costs)
- Rene Dry Wall Co. v. Strawberry Hill Associates, 182 Conn. 568 (1980) (owner’s entitlement to credit for reasonable expenditures completing/repairing abandoned/defective work)
- Walpole Woodworkers, Inc. v. Manning, 307 Conn. 582 (2012) (quantum meruit and unjust enrichment are alternative, restitutionary remedies)