Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 7-610 / 06-1964 Filed December 12, 2007

ROBERT ZAHN, d/b/a ZAHN PLUMBING & SHEET METAL, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. THOMAS W. SCHOLL and CATHY SCHOLL, Defendants-Appellants. ________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Allamakee County, Margaret L. Lingreen, Judge.

Thomas and Cathy Scholl appeal a district court judgment in favor of Robert Zahn on his petition to foreclose a mechanic's lien. AFFIRMED.

Robert J. Cowie, Jr. of Miller, Pearson, Gloe, Burns, Beatty & Cowie, P.L.C., Decorah, for appellant. Jeanne K. Johnson, Des Moines, and James U. Mellick, Waukon, for appellee.

Considered by Mahan, P.J., and Miller and Vaitheswaran, JJ.

2 VAITHESWARAN, J. Thomas and Cathy Scholl appeal a district court judgment in favor of Robert Zahn on his petition to foreclose a mechanic's lien. We affirm. I. Background Facts and Proceedings. Robert Zahn operated a business known as Zahn's Plumbing, Heating and Sheet Metal. He was contacted by Thomas Scholl about doing some work on a remodeling project. According to Zahn, Scholl briefly outlined the project and faxed "a list of things to be done, a drawing of the work to be done, and supposedly an estimate sheet to write the materials and labor which we were going to perform." Zahn took the transmittal cover sheet that accompanied the list and drawing, wrote "estimate on project" at the top, itemized the cost of the requested parts and labor, arrived at a total cost of $5063.43, and faxed the sheet back to Thomas Scholl. Scholl faxed back the estimate with an "accepted" notation at the bottom. Zahn inspected the construction site a month later. He concluded he

would have to re-engineer the piping, ductwork, vents and gas lines, and would have to reinstall an outside faucet and install a high-efficiency rather than a lowefficiency furnace. In addition, Zahn noted that insulation had to be removed and reinstalled and, at Cathy Scholl's request, floor joists had to be cut to move a stool three inches. Zahn sent the Scholls a revised billing statement that included an additional labor charge of $2500 and brought the total cost to $7090.26. Although Zahn's additional labor costs ended up being more than $2500, he

3 elected to stand by this statement. The Scholls declined to pay the amount on the revised statement. Zahn filed a mechanic's lien in the amount of $7090.26 and, later, a petition to foreclose the mechanic's lien. The district court entered judgment in favor of Zahn for $7090.26, with interest "as allowed by law from commencement of the suit." The court ordered the Scholls to pay Zahn $3000 in trial attorney fees and $266.42 in advanced costs. On appeal, the Scholls contend (1) "the district court erred in finding that an express contract term for price did not exist between the parties," (2) "the district court erred in finding that the defendant owed interest on the judgment entered against him," and (3) "the district court erred in ordering the defendant to pay plaintiff's attorney fees and in declining to order the plaintiff to pay defendant's attorney fees." The parties agree our review is de novo. II. Price. Iowa Code section 572.2(1) (2005) provides: Every person who shall furnish any material or labor for, or perform any labor upon, any building or land for improvement, alteration, or repair thereof, . . . by virtue of any contract with the owner, the owner's agent, trustee, contractor, or subcontractor shall have a lien upon such building or improvement, and land belonging to the owner on which the same is situated . . . to secure payment for the material or labor furnished or labor performed. The district court found that the initial faxes containing a cost estimate of $5063.43 did not amount to an express agreement as to price. The court pointed to the additional work that needed to be performed. Given the absence of an

4 express agreement on price, the court implied a promise to pay reasonable compensation, which the court found was $7090.26. The district court's fact findings are supported by the record. Although there was some disagreement concerning what Zahn knew when he faxed his original estimate to Scholl and whether, with diligence, he could have provided a more accurate initial estimate, that disagreement was uniquely within the district court's power to resolve. As we have stated, "in mechanic's lien cases, involving as they do numerous charges and countercharges which depend entirely on the credibility of the parties, . . . the trial court is in a more advantageous position than we to put credence where it belongs." Sulzberger Excavating, Inc. v. Glass, 351 N.W.2d 188, 191-92 (Iowa Ct. App. 1984). Turning to the court's legal conclusions, the parties do not dispute the applicable law and, specifically, the court's authority to determine a reasonable value for materials and labor in the absence of an express agreement on price. See Olberding Constr. Co., Inc. v. Ruden, 243 N.W.2d 872, 875-76 (Iowa 1976); Denniston & Partridge Co. v. Mingus, 179 N.W.2d 748, 752 (Iowa 1970); Sulzberger, 351 N.W.2d at 193-94. For these reasons, we affirm the district court's adoption of the higher cost figure. III. Interest. The Scholls next challenge the court's order requiring payment of interest "as required by law." They presume that the pertinent interest provision is Iowa Code section 535.11. They argue "[n]o contractual interest rate, of 18 percent or otherwise, was ever established between these parties." See Iowa Code

Download ROBERT ZAHN, d/b/a ZAHN PLUMBING & SHEET METAL, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. THOMAS W

Iowa Law