Date: 12-22-2012

Case Style: Artisan Construction of Oklahoma, Inc. v. Stuart Anderson

Case Number: CJ-2010-5870

Judge: Dana Kuehn

Court: District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Charles Greenough

Defendant's Attorney: Gregory Don Nellis

Description: Artisan Construction of Oklahoma, Inc. sued Stuart Anderson on a breach of contract theory. Anderson counterclaimed on a breach of contract theory and asserted a third party action against Greg Pilgrim on a breach of contract theory.

The statement of the case read to the jury by Judge Kuehn described the case as follows:

The parties to this case are: Artisan Construction of Oklahoma, Inc., the Plaintiff, and Stuart Anderson, the Defendant entered into a contract for Plaintiff to build a house at 4015 W. Orlando Place in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma for the Defendant.

Plaintiff claims that the work it did in building the house met the material terms of the contract, and the Defendant wrongfully terminated the contract. Plaintiff claims that Defendant has not paid for all of the work performed. Plaintiff claims that the building issues identified by Defendant are not material and could easily have been corrected by Plaintiff if allowed to perform the work or were corrected by the Plaintiff. Defendant claims that Plaintiff’s work in constructing the house did not meet the exact terms of the contract.

As a counterclaim against Plaintiff, Defendant claims that Plaintiff owes Defendant money for the cost to cure material defects in Plaintiff’s work and for breach of the construction contract. Plaintiff claims that the defects were not material, and were the type of issues that normally occur during construction of a house. Plaintiff claims it either corrected all of the issues, could easily have corrected them if allowed by Defendant, or did not warranty work of outside independently hired subcontractors. Defendant claims that Plaintiff committed fraud by telling the Defendant that he could perform the work and build the house that Plaintiff requested.

The trial of the issues presented started on November 11, 2012. The Court's notes from the trial are set forth below:

KUEHN, DANA: CASE CALLED FOR JURY TRIAL ON NOVEMBER 5, 2012. BOTH SIDES PRESENT IN OPEN COURT AND ANNOUNCE READY FOR TRIAL. DARREN RAGER, CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE OF PLAINTIFF PRESENT AND REPRESENTED BY CHARLES GREENOUGH. DEFENDANT PRESENT PRO SE.

THE JURORS ARE CALLED AND SWORN TO QUALIFICATIONS. THE JURY IS IMPANELED AND EXAMINED FOR CAUSE. THE JURORS ARE ACCEPTED FOR CAUSE.

OPENING STATEMENTS ARE MADE. FOUR (4) WITNESSES SWORN. RULE WAS INVOKED. COURT REPORTER DIANA CAVENAH. PLAINTIFF PRESENTS EVIDENCE AND RESTS. DEFENDANT DEMURS AND DEMURRER IS OVERRULED. PLAINTIFF MOVES FOR DIRECTED VERDICT ON FRAUD - DENIED; ON BREACH OF CONTRACT - GRANTED IN PART. BOTH SIDES REST.

THE JURY IS INSTRUCTED AS TO THE LAW. CLOSING ARGUMENTS ARE MADE. THE SWEARING OF THE BAILIFF IS WAIVED AND ON NOVEMBER 8, 2012, AT 12:05 P.M., THE JURY RETIRES FOR DELIBERATION IN CUSTODY OF THE BAILIFF. ON NOVEMBER 8, 2012, AT 2:45 P.M., THE JURY RETURNS INTO OPEN COURT WITH THEIR VERDICT, WHICH IS READ IN OPEN COURT, ORDERED RECORDED AND FILED, AND IS, TO WIT:

“WE, THE JURY, IMPANELED AND SWORN IN THE ABOVE TITLED CAUSE, DO, UPON OUR OATHS, FIND THE ISSUES IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFF, ARTISAN CONSTRUCTION OF OKLAHOMA, INC., ON ITS BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIM AND FIX THE DOLLAR AMOUNT OF ITS DAMAGES IN THE SUM OF $20,000.00.” JURORS CONCURRED. SIGNED BY ******* FOREPERSON.” (FROM BLUE VERDICT FORM) -AND- “WE, THE JURY, IMPANELED AND SWORN IN THE ABOVE TITLED CAUSE, DO, UPON OUR OATHS, FIND THE ISSUES IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFF, ARTISAN CONSTRUCTION OF OKLAHOMA, INC., AND AGAINST DEFENDANT STUART ANDERSON ON HIS COUNTERCLAIM FOR DECEIT/FRAUD.” JURORS CONCURRED. SIGNED BY *******, FOREPERSON.” (FROM BLUE VERDICT FORM) -AND- “WE, THE JURY, IMPANELED AND SWORN IN THE ABOVE TITLED CAUSE, DO, UPON OUR OATHS, FIND THE ISSUES IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFF, ARTISAN CONSTRUCTION OF OKLAHOMA, INC., AND AGAINST DEFENDANT STUART ANDERSON ON HIS COUNTERCLAIM FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT.” JURORS CONCURRED. SIGNED BY *******, FOREPERSON.” (FROM BLUE VERDICT FORM)

JURY DISCHARGED.

Outcome: Plaintiff's verdict for $20,000.00.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: