Bay City Const. Co., Inc. v. Hayes
Decision Date | 20 August 1993 |
Citation | 624 So.2d 1031 |
Parties | BAY CITY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. v. Henry HAYES, Sr. 1912009. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Thomas R. McAlpine of Sintz, Campbell, Duke & Taylor, Mobile, for appellant.
Vaughan Drinkard, Jr. and C. Gary Hicks of Drinkard, Ulmer, Hicks & Leon, Mobile, for appellee.
Bay City Construction Company, Inc., ("Bay City"), appeals from a judgment based on a jury verdict awarding damages to Henry Hayes, Sr., on a breach of contract claim. We affirm.
In October 1989, Bay City offered Hayes a job supervising a construction project on a naval base in Charleston, South Carolina. As part of the agreement, Hayes was to receive $15 per hour, expenses, and 20% of the profit from the project. Bay City subsequently entered into a written agreement with the Federal Government, and that agreement incorporated a statement of Hayes's duties.
Before the project in South Carolina was completed, Bay City requested that Hayes supervise a construction project in Alabama. Hayes agreed to supervise the project in Alabama, with the understanding that he was still to receive 20% of the profit from the South Carolina job, as previously agreed. Prior to the completion of both jobs, Hayes entered into a rehabilitation program and was thus unable to supervise the project in Alabama to completion.
In December 1990, Hayes met with Bay City to discuss the percentage of the profits he was to receive from the South Carolina project. Bay City tendered Hayes a $19,984.16 check, telling him that the total profit on the South Carolina project was about $79,000, which was lower than it had anticipated. After that, Hayes received information indicating that Bay City's actual profit on the project was $780,000.
In January 1991, Hayes sued Bay City, alleging breach of contract and fraud. Bay City moved for a summary judgment. The court denied the motion as to the breach of contract, but entered summary judgment as to the fraud count. A jury awarded Hayes $140,050.20, and the court entered a judgment in accordance with that verdict. Bay City appealed.
Bay City argues that Hayes's claim was barred under the theory of accord and satisfaction. We disagree.
We stated in Leisure American Resorts, Inc. v. Carbine Constr. Co., 577 So.2d 409, 411 (Ala.1990):
The record in this case does not reveal a dispute as to the amount due to Hayes. According to the terms of the agreement, Hayes was to receive $15 per hour, expenses, and 20% of the profit on the South Carolina project. When Bay City tendered the $19,984.16 check to Hayes, he expressed reservations about whether the amount of the check was correct; but, he said, because of his outstanding financial obligations, he accepted the check. Hayes's reservations in accepting the check do not evidence a dispute concerning the amount due, as Bay City contends. The dispute is whether Bay City accurately represented that the amount Hayes received was 20% of Bay City's profit from the South Carolina project. The jury could have found from the evidence that Hayes and Bay City had not entered an accord and satisfaction.
Bay City argues that the contract between it and Hayes violated the Statute of Frauds and was therefore void. We disagree.
Ala.Code 1975, § 8-9-2, provides:
This Court stated in Land v. Cooper, 250 Ala. 271, 276, 34 So.2d 313, 316 (1948):
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bader v. Johnson
... ... Counseling, Inc., Appellants-Defendants, ... Ronald JOHNSON and Connie ... ...
-
Glenn Constr. Co. Llc v. Bell Aerospace Serv. Inc.
...substantially performed under these provisions of the contract is a question of fact for the jury. See Bay City Constr. Co. v. Hayes, 624 So.2d 1031, 1034 (Ala.1993).33b. Express Conditions Precedent Independent of BWSC's Failure to Give a Recommendation Bell Aero also points to several exp......
-
Glenn Constr. Co. Llc v. Bell Aerospace Serv. Inc., CASE NO. 1:09-cv-250-MEF
...substantially performed under these provisions of the contract is a question of fact for the jury. See Bay City Constr. Co. v. Hays, 624 So. 2d 1031, 1034 (Ala. 1993).33 b. Express Conditions Precedent Independent of B WSC's Failure to Give a Recommendation Bell Aero also points to several ......
-
Ex Parte Keelboat Concepts, Inc.
...terms, is sufficient to entitle the contractor to recover." 17A Am.Jur.2d Contracts § 616 (2004). See also Bay City Constr. Co. v. Hayes, 624 So.2d 1031, 1034 (Ala.1993) (holding that the plaintiff was permitted to recover damages for breach of contract because, although he had not performe......