(978) 979-1223

ccobb@silverlakelegal.com

Silver Lake Legal

Construction, Insurance & Business Attorney Boston

'}}
Intentional contract interference? GC loses suit vs whistleblowing Architect.

Can't sue an honest evaluator if you get fired based on their reviews of your work. Court protects hired assessors

PARTIES

  • Homeowners – Shapiro
  • Architect – Mayer scope included reviewing GC invoices and contract administration.
  • GC – Cutting Edge

FACTS

Architect reviewing the requisitions regularly told owners that the GC was overbilling. Homeowners terminated GC contract prior to project completion  and hired another GC recommended by the Architect.

GC sued the Architect for “intentional interference” with advantageous contractual relations. In order to recover under this theory, the GC needed to show the Architect acted with “improper motive or means”.

The Architect asked the Court to throw out the case saying it was hired to review the GC invoices and even if there were mistakes in its review – there was no improper motive or means.

The trial judge dismissed the case and the GC appealed.

ISSUE

What kind of proof is needed to win on the theory that the party sued - intended to interfere with the contract of another?

HOLDING

Performing the intended scope to review invoices, cannot make out intentional interference without some showing of dishonesty or deceit.  Dismissal upheld.

REASONS

Case name Cutting Edge Homes, Inc. v Mayer (Mass Appeals Court 2024) The initial contract price was $2.1 M for a five month major home renovation job. The homeowners terminated the GC 15 months into the work after changes had increased the price substantially. The GC was to give a  monthly report of budgeted vs actual cost. The architect told the owner the GC was making stuff up in every invoice.

The Architect’s advice to the owners did lead them the terminate the GC but the Architect’s actions were not improper. Truthful information and honest advice within the scope of an engagement is not actionable. The architect would be protected from suit by the GC even if the architect’s advice was careless or negligent so long as it was not dishonest.

COMMENT

Honest opinions by advisors about the quality of others’ work should not lead to suits.

Get A Consult

Charles W. Cobb

Attorney at Law


ADDRESS

320 Nevada Street Ste 301,

Newton MA 02460

EMAIL

ccobb@silverlakelegal.com

PHONE NUMBER

(978) 979-1223

Silver Lake Legal Privacy Policy

This site was created using WordPress and uses Google Analytics to understand how posts are being received.

• This site has Google Analytics Advertising Features implemented involving Google Analytics cookies.

• Some of the ads you receive on pages across the internet are customized based on predictions about your interests generated from your visits over time and across different web-sites. This type of ad customization — sometimes called “interest-based” or “online behavioral” advertising — is enabled through various technologies, including browser cookies as well as other non-cookie technologies.

• Sliver Lake Legal has no policy or intent to use first and third party cookies together.

• Visitors can opt-out of the Google Analytics Advertising Features, including through Ads Settings, Ad Settings for mobile apps, or any other available means (for example, the NAI’s consumer opt-out).

• Users should also visit Google Analytics’ currently available opt-outs for the web.