Court Opinion

ID: 9661156
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 22:31:02.573861+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:14:25.914531
License: Public Domain

John A. Fogleman, Justice, concurring in part, dissenting in part. I do not agree that the preponderance of the evidence supports the holding that the contractor was liable on account of the settling of the driveway. Appellant testified that he told appellees that the driveway would settle for as much as a year, but that they told him they did not want to wait a year for the settlement to take place before the concrete driveway was put on the fill. The testimony of appellee Charles A. Ledbetter on the subject was a virtual admission that appellant’s subsequent testimony on the subject was correct. The settlement was a matter of “several inches” on a fill that sloped from the street level to the depth of the basement at the opposite end. I don’t know what there is about the evidence that required a more explicit warning. Otherwise, I agree with the result reached by the majority- I would disallow the award of damages for replacement of the driveway. I am authorized to state that Mr. Justice Byrd joins in this opinion.