Prince

Prince v. Thompson Building Materials CA2/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 13, 2015B246384California3,772 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

Facts Plaintiffs and appellants Jeffrey and Sherri Prince had construction work done at their Redondo Beach home (the property), including building of a patio and pool deck. The Princes hired a general contractor for construction at the property, and the general contractor retained a subcontractor, John Simich Construction, Inc. (Simich),1 to perform shoring, concrete foundation, and masonry work. Simich’s masonry work included the laying of flagstone in the patio and pool area. Simich bought materials for the project from defendant Thompson Building Materials (Thompson). Simich was informed by the Princes and their designer, Ginger McGann, that they would like to use a particular type of flagstone, called “Colonial Cream Patio Flag,” for construction of the patio and pool area. Simich purchased the flagstone by placing telephone orders with Thompson. Approximately 16 orders for the flagstone were placed, beginning in June 2005 and continuing through December 2006, for a total of more than $37,000. Following each telephone transaction, Thompson wrote up an “invoice,” which was mailed to Simich, and, upon delivery of the flagstone to the property, Simich was provided…

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.