Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 03-17-2015
Case Style: John C. Sacra and C. Jean Sacra v. Mulling Plumbing, Inc.
Case Number: CJ-2014-1617
Judge: Carlos Chappelle
Court: District Court, Tulsa County, Oklahoma
Plaintiff's Attorney:
If you need a personal injury lawyer in Tulsa, call: 888-354-4529 and we will help you.
Defendant's Attorney: Larry Leonard
Description:
MoreLaw Suites
A Better Place To Practice Law
624 South Denver and 601 South Boulder
Click Here For More Information
918-582-3993
Tulsa, OK - John C. Sacra and C. Jean Sacra sued Mulling Plumbing, Inc. on breach of contract theories claiming:
1. Plaintiff, John C. Sacra is a resident of the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of
Oklahoma.
2. Plaintiff C. Jean Sacra is resident of the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State Oklahoma.
3. Defendant, Mullin Plumbing, Inc. (hereinafter “Mullin’) is an Oklahoma for-profit corporation that does business in the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
4. The contract at issue in this litigation was entered into in the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
5. The subject property is located in the City of Tulsa, Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma.
6. The acts and/or omissions giving rise to this litigation occurred in the City of Tulsa, Tulsa
County, State of Oklahoma.
7. This Honorable Court has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter and venue in Tulsa County is appropriate.
Factual Summary
8. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraph No. 1 though No. 7 of their Petition as if specifically reasserted below.
9. Plaintiffs are the owners of a residential property located at 5509 E. 76th Street in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
10. On or about February 10, 2014, tenants of the Plaintiffs’ residence noticed a significant leak and reported the same to the Plaintiffs.
11. Plaintiffs engaged in a contract with Mullin to repair the leak. On or about February 11,
2014, an agent and/or employ of Mullin arrived at the Plaintiffs property but failed to find the leak. Mullin plumbing submitted an invoice for this work, which the Plaintiffs paid.
12. On or about February 12, 2014, another agent and/or employee of Mullin Plumbing arrived at the Plaintiffs’ property, ran a camera from a rooftop ventilation pipe, and claimed to have located the leak under a bathroom sink near the slab. This agent and/or employee would later claim to have performed a “static leak” test, which was never actually performed.
13. On or about February 13, 2014, another agent and/or employee of Mullin Plumbing arrived at the Plaintiffs’ property. Plaintiffs were forced to sign a contract under duress for services with a minimum charge of $1,255.00 before Mullin would continue the work they had begun.
14. This same employ andlor agent began excavating below the bathroom sink despite the fact that the subject leak was clearly visible as soon as the wooden floor below the sink was removed, as confirmed by the previous camera inspection.
15. This same emp’oy and! or agent subsequently began utilizing a jackhammer on the bathroom tile floor, despite the fact that the subject leak had already been found just below the wooden floor under the bathroom sink.
16. Because Mullin failed to properly fix the leak and because they had caused considerable, unnecessary property damage, Plaintiffs terminated their services and refused to pay their invoice.
17. Plaintiffs were forced to hire an additional contractor to repair the leak and an additional contractor to repair the damage to the tile bathroom floor.
First Cause of Action - Breach of Contract
18. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraph No. 1 though No. 17 of their Petition as if specifically reasserted below.
1 9. Plaintiffs entered into a contract with Mullin wherein Mullin was to find and repair a leak and Plaintiffs were to compensate Mullin for the same.
20. Mullin located the subject leak but failed to repair the same, despite taking payment from the Plaintiffs.
21. The contract stated that Mullin would perform a ‘static leak’ test. Mullin did not perform said test, but attempted to charge Plaintiffs for the same.
22. The contract implied that, for a minimum charge of $1,255.00, a team of agents and/or employees would be performing the repair services when, in fact, only one agent and/or employee was sent to the Plaintiffs’ residence to perform said services.
23. Mullin is in breach of the contract between Mullin and the Plaintiffs and, as a direct and proximate cause thereof, Plaintiffs have suffered damages in excess of $10,000.00, the exact amount of which to be determined by a trial on this matter.
Second Cause of Action - Property Damage
24. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraph No. 1 through No. 23 of their Petition as if specifically reasserted below.
25. Agents and!or employees of Mullin had a duty to perform their work in such as manner as to not cause unnecessary damage to the Plaintiffs’ property.
26. Agents and/or employees of Mullin breached that duty by performing a completely unnecessary and negligent excavation of the tile floor in the Plaintiffs’ bathroom.
27. As a direct and proximate result of Mullins acts and/or omissions, Plaintiffs have incurred property damage in excess of $10,000.00, the exact amount of which to be determined at a trial of this matter.
Third Cause of Action - Fraud
28. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraph No. 1 through 27 of their Petition as if specifically reasserted below.
29. Mullin made a material representation that they luiew was false with the intention that it should be acted upon by the Plaintiffs, who in fact acted upon it to their detriment, to wit:
a. Employees and/or agents of Mullin claimed to have performed a “static leak” test and represented that Plaintiffs had “failed” the test.
b. At the time of said representation, Mullin had not performed the subject test and therefore knew that representation - and the representation that the Plaintiffs “failed” the test - were false.
c. Mullin intended that the Plaintiffs rely on that false representation by paying additional sums to Mullin to perform unnecessary work.
d. Plaintiffs acted on these false representations to their detriment in that they paid for services that were not rendered and had to subsequently pay additional parties to make the necessary repairs and remediate property damage directly caused by Mullin.
30. As a direct and proximate cause of Mullin’s fraud, Plaintiffs have suffered damages in excess of $10,000.00, the exact amount of which to be determined at a trial of this matter.
Fourth Cause of Action - Violation of Title 15 O.S. 765.1. et seq
(The Oklahoma Home Repair Fraud Act)
31. Plaintiffs incoworate by reference Paragraph No. 1 through 30 of their Petition as if specifically reasserted below.
32. The acts and/or omissions underlying this litigation are subject to Title 15 O.S. §765.1, et. seq., known as “The Oklahoma Home Repair Fraud Act” (hereinafter “The Act).
33. The property at issue in this litigation is subject to The Act.
34. The Plaintiffs are parties meant to be protected by the provisions of the Act.
35. Defendant Mullin had a duty to perform services in compliance with the Act.
36. Mullin breached that duty and violated The Act by misrepresenting a material fact relating to the terms of the consumer transaction; to wit, by representing to the Plaintiffs that additional, excessive work was required on the subject property, despite the fact that the subject leak had been discovered and could be easily repaired.
37. Mullin breached that duty and violated The Act by creating an impression of the Plaintiffs which Mullin did not believe to be true; to wit, Mullin represented to Plaintiffs that there was a slab leak in the subject home, despite the fact that the subject leak had been discovered above the slab and could have been easily repaired.
38. Mullin breached that duty and violated The Act by promising Plaintiffs certain performance that Mullin never intended to perform; to wit, Mullin represented to the Plaintiffs that they had conducted a “static leak” test when in fact said test had not been performed and Mullin knew said test had not been performed.
39. Mullin breached that duty and violated The Act by employing deception and/or false pretenses to induce Plaintiffs to enter into a consumer transaction; to wit, Mullin falsely represented to Plaintiffs that the subject home failed a “static leak” test, which had never been performed, as a means of inducing Plaintiffs to enter into a contract for unnecessary slab leak repairs.
40. Mullin breached that duty and violated The Act by damaging the Plaintiffs’ property with the intent to enter into a consumer transaction; to wit, Mullin performed an unnecessary and negligent excavation of the Plaintiffs’ tile bathroom floor with the clear intent of charging Plaintiffs with the remediation and repair of the same.
41. As a direct and proximate cause of Mullin’s multiple violations of The Act, Plaintiffs have suffered damages in excess of $10,000.00, the exact amount of which to be
determined at a trial of this matter.
Fifth Cause of Action - Punitive Damages
42. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraph No. 1 through 41 of their Petition as if specifically reasserted below.
43. Mullin acted intentionally and with malice toward the Plaintiffs and/or with a reckless disregard for the Plaintiffs’ rights.
44. Mullin should be punished for the sake of example and to deter future similar behavior.
45. Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of punitive damages in excess of $10,000.00, the exact
amount of which to be determined at a trial of this matter.
Prayer for Relief
WHEREFORE, premises considered, Plaintiffs, John C. Sacra and Carol J. Sacra, pray for judgment in their favor and against Defendant, Mullin Plumbing, Inc., for an award of damages in excess of $10,000.00, for an award of punitive damages in excess of $10,000.00, for the attorney’s fees and costs incurred in prosecuting this litigation, and for all thither relief this Honorable Court deems just and equitable.
Court docket entries:
Date Code Description Count Party Amount
04-24-2014 TEXT
Civil relief more than $10,000 Initial Filing.
1
04-24-2014 CONTRACT
BREACH OF AGREEMENT - CONTRACT
04-24-2014 DMFE
DISPUTE MEDIATION FEE
$ 2.00
04-24-2014 PFE1
PETITION
Document Available (#1024731578)
$ 163.00
04-24-2014 PFE7
LAW LIBRARY FEE
$ 6.00
04-24-2014 OCISR
Oklahoma Court Information System Revolving Fund
$ 25.00
04-24-2014 CCADMIN02
Court Clerk Administrative Fee on $2 Collections
$ 0.20
04-24-2014 OCJC
Oklahoma Council on Judicial Complaints Revolving Fund
$ 2.00
04-24-2014 OCASA
Oklahoma Court Appointed Special Advocates
$ 5.00
04-24-2014 CCADMIN04
Court Clerk Administrative Fee on Collections
$ 0.50
04-24-2014 LTF
Lengthy Trial Fund
$ 10.00
04-24-2014 SMF
Summons Fee (Clerks Fee)
$ 5.00
04-24-2014 SMIMA
Summons Issued - Mailed by Attorney
04-24-2014 TEXT
OCIS has automatically assigned Judge Chappelle, Carlos to this case.
04-24-2014 ACCOUNT
Receipt # 2014-2835144 on 04/24/2014.
Payor:SACRA LAW Total Amount Paid: $218.70.
Line Items:
CJ-2014-1617: $168.00 on AC01 Clerk Fees.
CJ-2014-1617: $6.00 on AC23 Law Library Fee.
CJ-2014-1617: $0.70 on AC31 Court Clerk Revolving Fund.
CJ-2014-1617: $5.00 on AC58 Oklahoma Court Appointed Special Advocates.
CJ-2014-1617: $2.00 on AC59 Oklahoma Council on Judicial Complaints Revolving Fund.
CJ-2014-1617: $2.00 on AC64 Dispute Mediation Fees.
CJ-2014-1617: $25.00 on AC79 OCIS Revolving Fund.
CJ-2014-1617: $10.00 on AC81 Lengthy Trial Fund.
05-02-2014 EAA
ENTRY OF APPEARANCE (LARRY LEONARD ENTERS AS COUNSEL - COVERSHEET ATTACHED) / CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
Document Available (#1025112442)
MULLIN PLUMBING INC
06-03-2014 AC/C
ANSWER & COUNTER CLAIM / CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
Document Available (#1025765806)
MULLIN PLUMBING INC
06-09-2014 RESP
PLTF'S RESPONSE TO DEFT'S COUNTERCLAIM
Document Available (#1026064873)
SACRA, JOHN C
08-21-2014 MOC
PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL / A TO J /
Document Available (#1027000345)
SACRA, JOHN C
09-05-2014 RESP
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL / A2J
Document Available (#1027186353)
MULLIN PLUMBING INC
10-06-2014 CTFREE
CHAPPELLE, CARLOS; GRANTED/ORDER; PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL SET 10/23/14 AT 9:30 A.M.
10-08-2014 O
ORDER / SEE MINUTE ENTRY / CERT OF DELIVERY
Document Available (#1027420879)
10-23-2014 CTFREE
CHAPPELLE, CARLOS; CASE COMES ON FOR HEARING. DAMON SACRA APPEARS FOR PLAINTIFF; LARRY LEONARD APPEARS FOR DEFENDANT. MOTION TO COMPEL DENIED. DEFENDANT TO PRODUCE INSURANCE POLICY SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER WITHIN 10 DAYS. PARTIES TO SUBMIT AN AGREED SCHEDULING ORDER WITHIN 10 DAYS.
11-06-2014 CTFREE
CHAPPELLE, CARLOS; GRANTED/ORDER;
11-06-2014 CTFREE
CHAPPELLE, CARLOS; GRANTED/AGREED UPON PROTECTIVE ORDER;
11-14-2014 CTFREE
CHAPPELLE, CARLOS; NOTICE; SCHEDULING CONFERENCE SET 12/10/14 AT 9:00 A.M. DAMON SACRA, LARRY LEONARD;
11-14-2014 NO
Notice / SCHEDULING CONFERENCE SET FOR HEARING ON 12-10-14 @ 9 AM / CERTIFICATE OF MAILING / TO : DAMON EDWIN SACRA
Document Available (#1027829348)
11-14-2014 NO
Notice / SCHEDULING CONFERENCE SET FOR HEARING ON 12-10-14 @ 9 AM / CERTIFICATE OF MAILING / TO : LARRY D LEONARD
Document Available (#1027829352)
11-24-2014 O
ORDER / SEE DOCUMENT
Document Available (#1027978575)
11-24-2014 O
AGREED UPON PROTECTIVE ORDER
Document Available (#1027978571)
12-10-2014 CTFREE
CHAPPELLE, CARLOS; HEARING 12/10/14 STRICKEN AS PARTIES WILL SUBMIT AN AGREED SCHEDULING ORDER WITHIN 10 DAYS.
12-18-2014 NO
NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS / C2CV
Document Available (#1028054054)
01-07-2015 CTFREE
CHAPPELLE, CARLOS; GRANTED/SCHEDULING ORDER; PRETRIAL SET 7/14/15 AT 9:00 A.M.
01-13-2015 SCHO
SCHEDULING ORDER
Document Available (#1028392717)
01-15-2015 WL
DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LIST
Document Available (#1028392923)
02-17-2015 TEXT
DEFENDANT'S EXPERT WITNESSES / CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
Document Available (#1028666189)
MULLIN PLUMBING INC
03-16-2015 DWP
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE BY PLF
Document Available (#1028987441)
MULLIN PLUMBING INC
03-16-2015 DISPCVDMWP
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
1 MULLIN PLUMBING INC
03-16-2015 DISPCVDMWP
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
2 MULLIN PLUMBING INC
03-16-2015 DISPCVDMWP
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
3 MULLIN PLUMBING INC
03-16-2015 DISPCVDMWP
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
4 MULLIN PLUMBING INC
03-17-2015 DWP
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE BY DEF
Document Available (#1028258499)
SACRA, C JEAN
Outcome: Settled and dismissed with prejudice.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: