Paramore v. Rose
Docket: 36077; CA A42555
Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon; April 20, 1988; Oregon; State Appellate Court
H.T. Construction (H.T.) appealed a summary judgment in favor of Star Mountain Ranch (Star Mountain) regarding payment for excavation services. The court affirmed the summary judgment, concluding there was no express or implied agreement binding Star Mountain to H.T. Star Mountain had contracted with Dick Gasbar Excavating (Gasbar) for dam repairs, and Gasbar subcontracted the work to H.T., which incorporated relevant specifications from the Gasbar-Star Mountain contract. H.T. was authorized to communicate directly with Star Mountain and to sign change orders on Gasbar's behalf, but acted solely as Gasbar's subcontractor throughout the project. An engineer hired by Star Mountain approved H.T.'s pay requests but did not revise plans without consulting the original engineering firm. After H.T. completed substantial excavation work, the engineer identified issues and directed H.T. to modify its excavation methods, leading to additional costs. H.T. claimed it had a contractual relationship with Star Mountain based on the conduct of the parties and argued that Star Mountain's directives caused increased expenses. It also asserted a quantum meruit claim for the value of services rendered. Star Mountain countered that it had no contractual obligations to H.T., only to Gasbar, which was an independent contractor, not an agent. The court found H.T. failed to present sufficient evidence of a direct agreement with Star Mountain, reaffirming that H.T. acted as Gasbar’s representative and was not a party to the original contract. Consequently, the court upheld the summary judgment on both of H.T.'s claims, confirming there was no independent contractual relationship between H.T. and Star Mountain. The trial court's judgment did not resolve the claims against Gasbar, but a final judgment was entered per ORCP 67B.