Kevin Hulslander and David Katz obtained summary judgment for an architectural firm in a complex breach of contract case where Plaintiff alleged damages of $750,000 because the drawings produced by the architect allegedly did not comply with the Plaintiff’s design intent.
Kevin and David argued the architectural drawings—which Plaintiff signed off on—provided a clear, unambiguous design that did not include the fixtures plaintiff claimed it wanted. In opposition, Plaintiff claimed other documents, including meeting minutes, established the Plaintiff’s intent differed from the drawings as drafted.
Supreme Court in Broome County rejected Plaintiff’s arguments and found it failed to provide detailed expert proof to support its claims. As a result, the Court found the drawings to be clear and unambiguous as a matter of law: “[t]o find to the contrary would place architects, engineers, and construction contractors in the untenable position of never having a final set of approved design drawings.” The Court dismissed the case and ordered an inquest on the architect’s counterclaim of $200,000 plus interest.