American Structural Systems, Inc. v. R.B. Gay Construction Co.
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- David Lee Potts and Gloria Denise Potts (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Oklahoma 2023)
- Mole v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
In early 1989 R.B. Gay Construction Company (Gay) entered into a subcontract
Structural filed a complaint for damages against Gay for the balance of the contract price, and Gay filed a counterclaim for damages against Structural for breach of contract. After a non-jury trial, the trial court entered a final judgment finding that the evidence supported Gay’s counterclaim against Structural and awarded $47,353.81 in damages to Gay.
On appeal Structural argues that the trial court erred in construing the contract to require the metal deck. We find no error in the trial court’s ruling.
Structural next argues that the trial court erred in determining the amount of damages. We find error in the calculation. The trial court simply awarded damages equal to the total actual cost to Gay to complete the contract.
The measure of damages for cost to complete after breach of a construction contract where the contractor fails to complete performance is the difference between the contract price and the reasonable cost to complete the improvements in accordance with the contract. J.M. Beeson Co. v. Sartori, 553 So.2d 180, 183 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Sea Ledge Properties, Inc. v. Dodge, 283 So.2d 55 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. dismissed, 285 So.2d 618 (Fla. 1973). This rule is necessarily true because the contractor (or owner in the case of breach by a general contractor) has already agreed to pay the contract price for the contemplated work. In the present case the trial court mistakenly awarded Gay the entire cost of completion, without regard to Gay’s preexisting legal obligation to pay the contract price, as adjusted by any change orders. Therefore, the correct amount of damages to Gay is the difference between the contract price and $47,353.81, representing Gay’s cost of completion.
We REVERSE the damages award and REMAND for a recalculation of the correct amount pursuant to this opinion.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.