Carlson v. Nosko

10761-1998 (Pa. C.P. Erie County Feb. 9, 2000) ; Clearinghouse Number: 53012

Description

Homeowners May Rescind Construction Contract After Work Is Done When Contractor Did Not Give Notice of Right to Rescind

Abstract

The court granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiff homeowners and allowed them to rescind three construction contracts they made with defendant to perform work on their residence. Defendant, contrary to state law requirement, failed to give plaintiffs written notice of their right to rescission. Plaintiffs, dissatisfied with defendant’s work, refused to pay, and defendant sued. The parties stipulated to arbitration, and the arbitrators awarded defendant the full amount he requested. Plaintiffs appealed the award and filed a separate action indicating, for the first time, their desire to rescind the contracts. The court consolidated the two actions. Defendant argued that the doctrine of laches should preclude plaintiffs’ right to rescind in that they did not seek rescission until a year and a half after the contract was signed and a significant time after the work had been completed. Defendant also argued that allowing rescission would constitute unjust enrichment to plaintiffs and that he should be entitled to compensation based on quantum meruit. While the court described the result as “severe and not appealing,” its order granting rescission was required by statute and case law (Burke v. Yingling, 666 A.2d 288 (Pa. Super. 1995)). The court also ruled that plaintiffs were entitled to a refund of any payments made to defendant.

Additional Information

Docket Date
2000-02-09 00:00:00+00:00

Files

Filed under: