Court Opinion

ID: 9609707
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 03:30:26.431654+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:02:51.904421
License: Public Domain

MATTHEWS, Justice,
joined by RABI-NOWITZ, Chief Justice, dissenting in part.
I disagree with part II of the opinion. The trial court stated:
There’s been no testimony to controvert the fact that the amount of effort which Mr. Jones stated in his bills was, in fact, expended.
As the majority opinion points out, this finding was incorrect since there was clear and plausible testimony that Jones could not have been working on the excavation on December 2 and 3,1977, two of the days for which payment was sought. Since it is evident from the court’s finding that this testimony was not considered, I would remand for reconsideration of this point.