Questar Builders, Inc. v. CB Flooring, LLC
Maryland Court of Appeals
978 A.2d 651 (Md. Ct. App. 2009)
Questar Builders, Inc. (Questar) (defendant) hired CB Flooring, LLC (CB) (plaintiff) to install carpets in a Questar building. The contract, signed on September 29, 2005, contained a clause allowing Questar to terminate the contract without cause (termination-for-convenience clause). There was a discrepancy with respect to the type of carpeting contained in the contract versus the design drawings accompanying the contract. In addition, in December 2005, after the contract was executed, the interior designer changed the style of carpeting to a more expensive kind. Before CB responded to this change, Questar contacted Creative Touch Interiors (CTI), another floor installer that CB had outbid initially. CTI submitted a rebid for the project. On February 23, 2006, CB responded to the interior designer change and requested an additional $33,566 to complete the job. On February 27, 2006, Questar sent an unsigned contract to CTI based on CTI’s rebid. On March 3, 2006, CB cited a math error and changed its request to an additional $103,371 above the contract price. On March 23, 2006, Questar terminated the contract. Questar stated it was terminating for cause because CB breached the contract by refusing to perform. Questar also stated that even without the breach it was permitted to terminate the contract under the termination-for-convenience clause. CB brought suit. The Circuit Court for Baltimore County (trial court) held that CB did not breach the contract and that Questar did not correctly exercise the termination-for-convenience clause. Questar appealed, arguing that it was permitted to terminate the contract for any reason it deemed appropriate.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Harrell, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 166,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.