Thibodeau

Thibodeau v. Crum

Bad Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 354·4 Cal. App. 4th 749·6 Cal. Rptr. 2d 27·92 Daily Journal DAR 3769·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2444
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 19, 1992H008203California4,210 words

Opinion

Opinion

Capaccioli, J.

After arbitrating numerous construction deficiencies with the general contractor on their single-family home, plaintiffs asserted contract and tort claims against the subcontractor who constructed the driveway. Defendant subcontractor argued that the action was barred by application of the doctrine of res judicata, based upon the prior arbitration award. The court below rejected the defense of res judicata, conducted a trial, and entered judgment for plaintiffs.

On defendant’s appeal, we conclude that the action is indeed barred by res judicata and reverse.

Factual Background and Procedural History

In August 1986, Peter and Judy Thibodeau entered into a contract with Paul Eller & Associates for the construction of a single-family home in Aptos. Assisted by several subcontractors, Eller began construction in October 1986. The project was completed beyond the contract deadline and passed county and fire department inspections in December 1987. In February 1988, the Thibodeaus moved in.

The Thibodeaus complained of numerous construction deficiencies. They initiated arbitration proceedings against Eller pursuant to the construction contract which, in the words of the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.