Construction Law
Editor:Kenneth A. Slavens, EsquireIn a suit by a contractor to recover an unpaid contract
balance on a construction contract, the Supreme Court held that the
award of attorney's fees under the Private Prompt Pay Act (PPPA), if
requested in the prayer, is appropriate as long as the pleading sets
out the necessary elements and that specific reference in the pleading
to the PPPA is not necessary. Stucco & EIFS Design, LLC v. Landau, No. 90771 (Mo. banc, October 26, 2010), Russell, J.
The contractor's suit sought recovery of the contract balance of
$4,900.0 in a suit against the owner of project. At trial, the
contractor asked the court to award attorney's fees pursuant to the
PPPA. The trial court awarded $10,567.04 in fees.
The owner appealed and argued that the petition made no mention of
PPPA and did not set forth any basis for the recovery of attorney's
fees.
The Supreme Court held that there are only two requirements for
pleading a violation of the PPPA: (1) the parties entered into a
private construction contract, and (2) one or more payments were not
made pursuant to the contract. The Court found that both elements
were pleaded in the contractor's petition. The prayers for relief
associated with each count requested a judgment for the contract
balance with interest and attorney's fees.
The PPPA does not require specific reference to the statute in the
pleading, the Court decided. A court may award any relief the PPPA
provides, including attorney's fees, as long as the party has pleaded
the necessary elements of the act and has requested that relief in the
prayer.
The Missouri Bar Courts Bulletin, 11-Jun