Shoals

Shoals v. Home Depot, Inc.

Good Law
422 F. Supp. 2d 1183·2006 WL 707175·2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16120
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 17, 2006105CV011850WWSMSCalifornia4,141 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wanger, J.

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS, GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF’S PRAYER FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES (DOC. 18), AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TRIAL BY JURY (DOC. 16).

I. INTRODUCTION

This lawsuit concerns an oral home improvement contract allegedly entered into by Plaintiff Sir Lee Sehoals and Daniel Rule, a former employee of Defendant Home Depot, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Home Depot”). Before the court for decision are (1) Defendant’s motion for partial judgment on the pleadings, in which Home Depot seeks dismissal of Plaintiffs contract claim and requests that Plaintiffs prayer for attorney’s fees be stricken (Doc. 18); and (2) Plaintiff’s motion for trial by jury (Doc. 16).

II. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff, who has been blind since 1986, must exercise on a regular basis for health reasons. (Compl. at ¶ 8.) In January 2004, Plaintiff became interested in constructing an addition to his home for use as a home gym. (Id.) Plaintiff has little knowledge of the building industry, so he contacted the city of Corcoran, California, where he resides, to seek advice as to the approximate cost of such an addition. (Id. at ¶ 9.) He was advised…

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.