ST. LOUIS — The city of Dardenne Prairie has lost its appeal in the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District involving breach of contract claims against Adams Concrete and Masonry over a contract for bricks.
A three-judge panel held May 30 that St. Charles County Circuit Court Judge Matthew Thornhill properly granted judgment on Adams’ pleadings.
The city paid Adams $22,022.13 for bricks intended for a proposed new parks building in November 2009, in addition to a separate brick order of $86,824.47 intended for an approved new City Hall, according to background information in the ruling.
In December 2010, a year after it was under contract, the city decided not to construct the parks building, and brick supplier Raineri never delivered the remaining order of bricks to the city.
As for contract language, the city passed two ordinances related to the construction of a new City Hall in October 2008. One was for architectural services and another was for construction services, both to be performed by Studio One Architecture.
After the city contracted for construction management services, Studio One advised the city to purchase bricks for City Hall, as well as for the proposed parks building to "hedge against the rising cost of bricks," the ruling states.
The ruling states that several years went by without any communication regarding the parks building bricks, but as part of an audit in November 2014, the city contacted Adams about the bricks that had been ordered "for the never-completed Parks Building."
"Upon learning that Raineri had either donated or re-sold those bricks to a third party, the City sued Studio One, Adams Concrete, and Raineri in a six count petition," the ruling states.
The city's suit only asserted one claim against Adams for failing to deliver the portion of bricks intended for the parks building or failing to ensure the bricks were stored properly after fabrication, which was subject to this appeal.
In its answer to the city's suit, Adams filed a counter-claim, saying the city breached its agreement when it canceled the construction of the parks building.
The city answered that its agreement with Adams was not enforceable because it had not been approved by the board of aldermen as required by law, according to the background information in the ruling.
"Seizing on the City's affirmative defenses, Adams Concrete moved for judgment on the pleadings," the ruling states. "In its motion, Adams Concrete argued that the City, in its affirmative defense, admitted that the Board did not approve Exhibit 1 and that, to the extent the writing attached as Exhibit 1 purposed to be a contract, it was void under Section 432.070. The motion concluded that the City therefore was barred from recovering on its breach of contract claim against Adams Concrete because the City's claim was also based on its allegation that Exhibit 1 served as the contract between the parties."
The appeals court, comprised of Judges Kurt Odenwald and Gary Gaertner Jr. and Presiding Judge James Dowd, agreed with Adams.