Search Results

Indiana Court of Appeals
John Sayre and Sam the Concrete Man v. Lee Trost
No. 25A-PL-1007

Civil. Appeal from the Hamilton Superior Court, Judge Darren J. Murphy. Affirms the trial court’s judgment in favor of Lee Trost following a bench trial on claims arising from the installation of a concrete patio. Holds the evidence supports the trial court’s findings that the contractors breached the parties’ agreement and performed deficient and negligent work, including pouring mismatched concrete, incorrectly re-pouring sections, failing to complete the project within the contemplated timeframe, and leaving multiple defects and hazards unresolved nearly two years after the contract was executed. Further holds the trial court did not err in awarding $19,961 in damages, including return of the $7,425 deposit, $200 for drain and fence repairs, $836 for patio removal and $11,500 for replacement, where the court found the patio must be torn out and replaced, the existing work devalued the property, and the damages were within the scope of the evidence and necessary to compensate Trost for the loss of the benefit of the bargain. Judge Felix dissented, concluding the trial court erred by entering judgment on Trost’s negligence claim because the contractors’ duty arose solely from the contract and there was no invasion of interests beyond a breach of contractual obligations. He also concluded the trial court improperly awarded the full replacement cost of the patio, reasoning that while Trost was entitled to recover his deposit, repair costs and removal expenses, paying for an entirely new patio placed him in a better position than he would have occupied absent the breach. He would affirm the breach-of-contract finding, reverse the negligence judgment, and remand for a redetermination of damages, including any consequential damages proven with reasonable certainty. Appellant’s attorney: Jeffrey K. Eicher. Appellee’s attorney: Julie A. Camden. This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Denitra Jones v. Full Spectrum Property Management
No. 25A-EV-532

Civil. Appeal from the Madison Circuit Court, Magistrate Kevin M. Eads. Reverses the trial court’s order granting possession of rental property to Full Spectrum Property Management and awarding damages, attorney fees, and costs, and remands with instructions to reinstate Jones’ counterclaim. Holds the landlord failed to carry its burden of proof on its breach-of-contract and possession claims and that the trial court improperly shifted the burden to Jones by relying on her equivocal testimony rather than requiring the landlord to present evidence of lease terms, arrearage calculations, and statutory notice of termination. Further holds the conduct of the possession hearing denied Jones due process of law where the proceeding began under the assumption the landlord was entitled to possession, Jones was not afforded a meaningful opportunity to present defenses — including habitability and notice arguments — and no landlord representative testified. Concludes the trial court erred by prospectively declaring Jones’ personal property abandoned and disposable before she vacated the premises. Further concludes the trial court mishandled Jones’ counterclaim by questioning its validity, failing to follow small claims procedures regarding service, and effectively dismissing it without a meaningful hearing. Appellant’s attorneys: Megan Stuart; Jennifer W. Terry; Renee Skeete. Appellee: No appellee’s brief filed.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.