Title: Greenmoss Builders v. King

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under V.R.A.P. 40
as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont Reports.
Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Vermont Supreme
Court, 111 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05602 of any errors in order
that corrections may be made before this opinion goes to press.


                                No. 88-108


Greenmoss Builders, Inc.                     Supreme Court

                                             On Appeal From
     v.                                      Washington Superior Court

Richard King, Harriet King, and              April Term, 1989
King & King


James L. Morse, J.

Thomas F. Heilmann and Janice A. Forgays of Thomas F. Heilmann, P.C.,
  Burlington, for plaintiff-appellee

King & King, Waitsfield, and George E. Brooks, Montpelier, for defendants-
  appellants


PRESENT:  Allen, C.J., Peck, Gibson and Dooley, JJ., and Barney, C.J.
          (Ret.), Specially Assigned


     DOOLEY, J.   A builder and his lawyers parted ways.  Appellee Premar
Corporation/Greenmoss Builders (hereinafter plaintiff) sued appellants
Richard King, Harriet King, and King & King (hereinafter defendants) to
recover money allegedly owed on a construction contract.  Defendants
counterclaimed for an amount allegedly overpaid on an earlier construction
contract.  Plaintiff then added a claim for monies owed on that first
contract.
     The trial court entered judgment in favor of plaintiff (FN1) for the amount
owed on the second contact, plus interest at 1 1/2 % per month from the date
payment was due.  The court denied defendants recovery on the first
contract, ruling that defendants' conduct subsequent to the alleged
overpayment constituted a waiver of the right to pursue damages.  The court
also denied plaintiff's claim for additional monies on the first contract,
ruling that defendants had not waived their rights as to those payments.  We
affirm the trial court's decision on the claim and the counterclaim, and we
vacate the order to pay interest and remand the case for a recalculation of
the interest to be awarded on the accrued damages.
     The facts in this case, taken in the light most favorable to the
prevailing party and excluding all modifying evidence, New England Road
Machinery Co. v. Calkins, 121 Vt. 118, 120,