167 So. 3d 818
La. Ct. App.2014Background
- Sanga contracted with Augustino Brothers Construction (Padermo) in May 2012 for a roof replacement and paid a $9,132.02 deposit; the work was never performed.
- Parties entered a second contract in August 2012 after changing shingle type; dispute escalated after Hurricane Isaac and Padermo ceased working on the job.
- Padermo refunded part of the deposit, then later deposited the remainder with the court after criminal charges; he pleaded guilty to misdemeanor theft and Sanga was ultimately refunded the full deposit pre-trial.
- Sanga sued Padermo and Augustino Brothers for fraud, breach of contract, theft, and sought to pierce the corporate veil and recover economic and non‑economic damages.
- At bench trial the court found a contract existed but concluded the contract “never came to fruition” and that Sanga failed to prove fraud, breach damages, or compensable mental anguish; judgment dismissing claims was entered.
- Sanga appealed; the appellate court affirmed, holding the trial court’s factual findings were not manifestly erroneous and that Sanga failed to meet the preponderance standard for damages and fraud.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Existence of contract | Contract existed between Sanga and Augustino | Denied liability but did not dispute contract existence at trial | Court found a contract existed (no reversible error) |
| Fraud (intent to deceive) | Padermo lied about shingle availability and credit issues to overcharge / avoid performance | Denied fraudulent intent; limited testimony and no direct explanation for withdrawal | Insufficient proof of specific intent to defraud; fraud not established |
| Breach of contract & economic damages | Failure to perform caused out‑of‑pocket expenses, higher replacement costs, higher insurance rates | Returned full deposit (eventually); no admissible evidence of claimed economic losses; limited testimony | Breach damages not proven by preponderance; trial court’s denial of damages affirmed |
| Mental anguish, embarrassment, inconvenience | Emotional distress from failed contract and neighborhood advertising warranted recovery | Emotional testimony did not reach compensable level; credibility issues | Emotional damages not proven at compensable level; award denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Marrero v. Daniels, 80 So.3d 612 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2011) (appellate standard for reviewing factual findings)
- Miller v. Leonard, 588 So.2d 79 (La. 1991) (plaintiff’s preponderance burden in civil cases)
- State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Torregano, 769 So.2d 754 (La. App. 5 Cir.) (preponderance standard explained)
- Lirette v. State Farm Ins. Co., 563 So.2d 850 (La. 1990) (credibility and inferences on conflicting testimony)
- Favrot v. Favrot, 68 So.3d 1099 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2011) (elements of breach of contract)
- Corbello v. Iowa Prod., 850 So.2d 686 (La. 2003) (contract damages generally governed by the contract)
- Terrebonne Concrete, LLC v. CEC Enterprises, LLC, 76 So.3d 502 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2011) (fraud requires specific intent)
- Shubert v. Tonti Dev. Corp., 30 So.3d 977 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2009) (definition and recovery for mental anguish)