Compton telephoned Baker to inquire about his equipment but Baker told him to talk to his lawyer. He did retrieve the one furnace remaining uninstalled on the first floor. He found the second and third floors were locked. When Compton had not received payment by January 4, 1977, (his counsel advised him to wait a bit longer than ten days after the letter of December 17, 1976) he returned to the Baker building intending to take back the uninstalled but delivered equipment. Compton declined to do so at that time believing the equipment for the first and second floors had to remain delivered for the ten days he had given Baker to pay the $12,000 or Compton would be in breach of the contract. On approximately December 27 or 28, 1976, Baker telephoned Compton and told him he could come retrieve his equipment from the building.
*385 On December 17, 1976, Compton, through counsel, made formal written demand for payment of the $12,000, advising Baker if payment was more than ten days delinquent, he would deem the contract defaulted.
Compton refused to accept less than the $12,000 due and performed no work under the contract after December 3, 1976. Baker offered to pay $3,000 but refused to pay $12,000, stating Compton had not performed $12,000 worth of work. Compton again orally demanded payment of the $12,000 installment due under the contract before he would resume installation. Baker requested that Compton begin the third furnace installation. Seven air conditioners were also delivered to Compton's trailer by December 3, 1976.Ī meeting was arranged in mid December, 1976, at which Williamson assured Baker the two installed units would heat effectively when the remaining units were installed and functional. All thirteen furnaces were delivered either to Baker's building or to Compton's trailer in front of the building by Decemwhen Baker and Compton disagreed over the ability of the two installed furnace units to heat the retail store in which they were placed and Compton orally demanded the initial payment of $12,000 under the contract. The contract provided work was to commence immediately, progress as rapidly as possible, and be completed by June 1, 1977.Ĭompton began work November 15, 1976, the day of the contract. Payment of the $27,000 purchase price was to be in installments, the first of which was "$12,000 on delivery of equipment for 1st and 2nd floors of Owners (sic) building.
Will compton contracts install#
Baker and Compton entered into a Sales and Installation Contract on Novempursuant to which Baker agreed to buy and Compton agreed to sell and install thirteen (13) gas furnaces, thirteen (13) electric air conditioners, and ten (10) gas water heaters in an existing three story building in Tipton, Indiana, Baker was renovating for commercial and residential use. We remand for correction of the judgment and affirm subject to the correction.
Will compton contracts trial#
Baker raises three issues on appeal:ġ) whether there was sufficient evidence to support the judgment for Compton on his counterclaim Ģ) whether the trial court erred in failing to apply the principle of mitigation of damages ģ) whether the damages awarded Compton were excessive. Compton counterclaimed for foreclosure of a mechanic's lien he had filed against the property. Baker alleged Compton performed certain installation work in an unworkmanlike manner and, along with Williamson, recommended furnaces of insufficient capacity to heat the intended area. Baker sued Compton and a second defendant, Williamson Company, (Williamson) for rescission of a contract to purchase from Compton and have Compton install heating and air conditioning equipment in an existing three-story building owned by Jeannine Baker being renovated by James Baker. Baker (Baker), appeal the judgment for appellee, George William Compton d/b/a Compton Climate Makers (Compton) and against Baker on Compton's counterclaim for foreclosure of a mechanic's lien. Watson, Watson & Hobbs, Tipton, for appellees.Īppellants, Jeannine L. Emerson, Bose, McKinney & Evans, Indianapolis, Joe F. George William COMPTON d/b/a Compton Climate Makers and Williamson Company, Appellees (Defendants below).Ĭourt of Appeals of Indiana, Second District.
0 kommentar(er)
