Preview:

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.

FILED
Jun 19 2008, 8:55 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS: SHAWNA MEYER EIKENBERRY CARL R. PEBWORTH Baker & Daniels LLP Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: JEREMY M. TEMPEL Bloomington, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
TAMYRA D'IPPOLITO and RENATO D'IPPOLITO, Appellants-Defendants, vs. GENE D. BARLEY, d/b/a Freedom Contracting, Inc., Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 53A01-0709-CV-453

APPEAL FROM THE MONROE CIRCUIT COURT The Honorable Stephen R. Galvin, Judge Cause No. 53C06-0511-PL-2173

June 19, 2008 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION BAILEY, Judge

Case Summary Tamyra and Renato d'Ippolito (the "d'Ippolitos") appeal the trial court's judgment of $6288 in favor of Gene D. Barley, d/b/a Freedom Contracting, Inc. ("Gene"). We affirm. Issues The d'Ippolitos raise five issues, which we consolidate and re-state as: I. Whether there was sufficient evidence that the parties entered into an oral contract for renovation work; Whether the trial court clearly erred in making its findings as to Gene's damages; and Whether there was any evidence to support the judgment against Renato. Facts and Procedural History The facts most favorable to the judgment are as follows. Tamyra owned a theater in Linton, Indiana and operated a caf

Download Tamyra and Renato D'Ippolito v. Gene R. Barley d/b/a Freedom Contracting, I

Indiana Law