Appellants alleged that the paint job appeared lumpy and that the paint peeled, and ascribed these problems to Grafio's failure to properly sand and spackle the surface of the house before painting. Appellants filed a separate suit in the Civil Division against Grafio for breach of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation and property damage, consisting of Grafio's failure to obtain a smooth finish on the painted surface. Grafio sued appellants in the Small Claims Branch of the Superior Court for the final $1,845 owed on the contract. The parties' relationship continued to deteriorate, and when the final payment was due, appellants paid with a check on which they had placed a stop payment order. Prior to this time, however, appellants began to raise questions about the quality of Grafio's work. The parties' contract provided that payments were to be made in three installments, with the final installment of $1,845 to be paid when the work was completed. We affirm.Īppellee Sai Grafio, a professional housepainter, agreed to paint appellants' house for $5,650. The trial judge granted Grafio's motion for dismissal and summary judgment on the grounds that the breach of contract claim was barred by res judicata and that appellants had failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact on the remaining claims. #GRAFIO 3 REVIEW PRO#*984 Gerald Weaver and Katherine Brewer, pro se.Īlan Dumoff, Washington, D.C., for appellee.īefore ROGERS, Chief Judge, STEADMAN and FARRELL, Associate Judges.Īppellants Gerald Weaver and Katherine Brewer brought this suit against appellee Sai Grafio for breach of contract, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional *985 distress. 595 A.2d 983(1991) Gerald WEAVER and Katherine Brewer, Appellants,ĭistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |