Berry v. Lucas
Oregon Court of Appeals
150 P.3d 424 (2006)
- Written by Mike Begovic, JD
Facts
Norma and Robert Berry (plaintiffs) and Carolyn Lucas (defendant) entered into a contract requiring Lucas to deliver and set up a manufactured home on the Berrys’ lot. The contract obligated Lucas to set up a home that was suitable for occupancy, including carpet, railings, and sheetrock. Under the contract, the Berrys were to pay 50 percent down and the rest on delivery. The contract contained an insurance provision, which underscored that the Berrys were not covered by insurance until accepted by an insurance company and which indemnified Lucas for damage sustained before the purchase of insurance. The home was delivered in two sections, but before it could be completed, a severe storm caused water damage. At the time, the house was still devoid of carpet, railings, and exterior siding, and the house was therefore not ready for the Berrys to move in. Neither party had insurance for the home. The Berrys paid a contractor to repair the damage and then filed suit to recover the repair bill and lost wages, alleging that Lucas violated the Unlawful Trade Practices Act and that Lucas was responsible because the damage occurred before delivery and completion of the home. A bench trial resulted in an award for the Berrys. Lucas appealed, contending that the insurance provision passed the risk of loss to the Berrys before the damage occurred.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cramer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.