Byrd Brothers, LLC v. Herring
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-00935-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-16-2003 Opinion Author: KING, P.J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contract - Reasonable opportunity to cure - Mitigation of damages Judge(s) Concurring: McMILLIN, C.J., BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE, IRVING, MYERS, CHANDLER AND GRIFFIS, JJ., CONCUR. SOUTHWICK, P.J., NOT PARTICIPATING. Non Participating Judge(s): SOUTHWICK, P.J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CONTRACT |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-02-2002 Appealed from: Lafayette County Circuit Court Judge: Henry L. Lackey Disposition: JUDGMENT ENTERED FOR BOBBY HERRING D/B/A HERRING ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,937.05. |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | BYRD BROTHERS, LLC |
ROBERT P. CHAMBERLIN |
||
| Appellee: | BOBBY HERRING D/B/A HERRING ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING | OMAR D. CRAIG |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Contract - Reasonable opportunity to cure - Mitigation of damages |
| Summary of the Facts: | Byrd Brothers, LLC, a construction company, contracted with Bobby Herring d/b/a/ Herring Plumbing and Electric to perform plumbing work on Sage Meadows, a condominium complex. Problems developed between the parties and eventually, Herring filed suit against Byrd Brothers seeking damages of $21,836.77. Byrd Brothers filed a counter-claim for damages it suffered due to Herring’s defective workmanship. The judge entered judgment in favor of Herring Plumbing and Electric against Byrd Brothers in the amount of $9,937.05. Byrd Brothers appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | A party who has breached or failed to properly perform a contract has a responsibility and a right to cure the breach, and the non-breaching party must give him a reasonable opportunity to cure the breach. In this case, Herring was given several opportunities to cure his repeated contractual breaches, but did not do so. Having given Herring a reasonable opportunity to cure, Byrd Brothers was obligated to move forward and mitigate damages. The trial court awarded Herring the balance of the contract price. What Herring was entitled to was the balance of the contract price less the reasonable costs of mitigation of damages incurred by Byrd Brothers. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
