ÿWPCÓ  ÙÿA„2/0B·=œ¸>*òÙ>RY•ÜÄû@²ìQˆãC·gαEøËÉI Ü²s])èЇ*òš)&BÄ! ñ³d€=9ƒÛæcdïXÓ_ï¥ÅRùö£vÆ~‹Š&ÚØÐG µŸéYE2ï7kÆ,QìjÙ~y4v.5©®èñ©q±ß3Ô«#>6±Z¡ã²_ÂÌj¹bñþ¨sÂE¶Õ Âê°›F¢þô9Láóš—¨øccéø¿Ú"óa èÚ¶\€;q[‚žÓ ?]ÝE;£gC$*æ9žñªi`s/vŽ2ü@q®§w+ÌˆÊæÜë–Á‚t–ìNÐZh˜T\„³ë¸Nû zwé”ÃëÌÞŠ¸dÛ¸M=/¦Ý?Cáó³°š¥ïœý“I¸Ê<Ç÷V…ѹ³7%¹,…ïÊž½Ì‚õ[äJ•<Ú¡úxJªrtƒcÌ+œèZo5øŠ«™½úžs þš’\YàB}I< ÉÏ’HDTOiÞ å·OxÁG–¿<óÎy“‘—V2™© מ f&Ö½®Ó¯ZžüÔY6£cÑ+/9Xƒ".ùZ@vâYþ73Ãû­e…šÁLÐrŠ×X’Œ' å‚âdIÁιÕc´b %\^ b 0ˆnUhNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÉÐ Ê™ ÆcÆ)ÆïƵÑ{NL 0 DN ’EŸÄ¡÷eM\Õ©Ä~¾BÆbÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆÆ 0 ëÎÎÎÎ B¹¹ 0¤Ö D5z D-¯ 0KÜÜ AS'Æz 0¤@ 0Dä A«( »Ù‚–3  (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular=€M3b013c93|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4250 PCL 6ÈÈÈÈ0 Embry COAmeruit P.J. W.S.DeLaney Hendersonvilleg]uaranteed n]oAddl i]tbartopsjobsite HCAStaubachServs T]heNatl APCOArchibold S.W.unrefutedLathamSwaffordEmburyLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 ÇÝ ƒR¨~$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµ‰ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€loan€was€paid€down€to€$550,000€by€the€Small€Business€Administration.€(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ý ƒR¨~$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµ‰ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔLatham€owned€a€BP€Gas€station€about€200€or€300€yards€from€the€site€of€the€Project,€and€she€operated€fromÐ ° Ðthere.€€ ºÝ ƒR¨~$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµ‰ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€trial€transcript€shows€that€Campbell€was€scheduled€to€testify€at€trial,€but€was€prevented€from€appearingÐ ° Ðbecause€of€harsh€weather€conditions.€€The€parties€took€a€post„trial€deposition€and€submitted€it€to€the€trial€court€insteadÐ tÄ Ðof€requiring€Campbell€to€appear€in€person.€€ íÝ ƒR¨~$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµ‰ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔCampbell€later€testified€that€the€supplies€could€have€cost€$96,284,€but€he€could€not€remember€the€exact€price.€ CÝ ƒR¨~$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµ‰ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔTo€the€extent€that€RBI€claims€damages€for€€furniture€and€equipment€in€addition€to€these€amounts€charged€toÐ ° ÐLatham,€we€find€the€evidence€insufficient€to€support€RBIððs€claim.€€ ËÝ ƒR¨~$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµ‰ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔLatham€makes€no€claim€for€the€amount€that€she€paid€RBI€in€excess€of€$650,000. ºÝ ƒR¨~$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµ‰ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔEd€Anderson€is€not€related€to€Tom€Anderson,€the€architect.€€ ´Ý ƒR¨~$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµ‰ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôð ðAIAðð€is€the€American€Institute€of€Architects.€€ ¼Ý ƒR¨~$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµ‰ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€earlier€proceedings€in€this€case,€on€August€27,€2001,€the€trial€court€had€ruled€that€the€arbitration€clause€inÐ ° Ðthe€AIA€document€was€unenforceable,€because€there€had€been€ð ðno€meeting€of€the€minds,€no€signed€contract,€and€no€oralÐ tÄ Ðagreement€for€any€binding€arbitration.ðð€€- ù-(|G2¨~$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµ‰ò»»Ô d(|3?d$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3?d$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€A»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼A»»»ÔÑ8€E XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îˆî»¼AÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼A»îîˆ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓJuly€12,€2005€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XE X»¼AÔÌò òÔ#†¼A»XXE ò#ÔRETAIL€BUILDERS,€INC.òòóó€v.€MARGARET€LATHAMòòóóÔ‡XE X»¼AÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAn€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Sumner€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€20350„C€€€€€€C.€L.€Rogers,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2004„00771„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€22,€Ô_Ô2005Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€is€a€construction€case.€€The€plaintiff€construction€manager€agreed€to€manage€the€constructionÐ xÈ  Ðof€a€restaurant€for€the€defendant€restaurant€owner.€€Preliminary€documents€showed€that€theÐ d´ Ðconstruction€manager€agreed€to€provide€its€services€for€a€guaranteed€maximum€price.€€DuringÐ P  Ðconstruction,€there€were€unanticipated€problems€that€increased€costs.€€After€construction€wasÐ <Œ Ðcompleted,€the€construction€manager€sought€payments€from€the€restaurant€owner€over€and€above€theÐ (x Ðguaranteed€maximum€price,€but€the€restaurant€owner€refused€to€pay€more.€€The€construction€managerÐ d Ðfiled€this€lawsuit€against€the€restaurant€owner,€claiming€that€the€parties€did€not€enter€into€anÐ P Ðenforceable€contract,€and€that€the€restaurant€owner€should€pay€the€construction€manager€theÐ ì< Ðreasonable€value€of€its€services€under€a€theory€of€òòquantum€meruitóó.€€After€a€bench€trial,€the€trial€courtÐ Ø( Ðheld€in€favor€of€the€restaurant€owner,€determining€that€the€parties€had€entered€into€a€binding€fixedÐ Ä Ðprice€contract.€€The€construction€manager€now€appeals.€€We€affirm€in€part€and€reverse€in€part€the€trialÐ ° Ðcourtððs€determination€and€remand€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion.€Ð œì ÐÌ€€Ð tÄ ÐÓ«Óò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€is€Ð `° ÐAffirmed€in€Part,€Reversed€in€Part,€and€Remandedó óÐ L œ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼A»àXE l#ÔÔ‡XE X.¼AÔHolly€M.€Kirby,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€Court,€in€which€òòW.€Frank€Ô#†¼A»àXE 9 #ÔÔ‡XE X.¼AÔCrawford,€P.J.,€W.S.,óóÐ $"t! Ðand€òòDavid€R.€Farmer,€J.óó,€joined.Ð #`" ÐÌRobert€L.€DeLaney,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Retail€Builders,€Inc.Ð è$8 $ ÐÌCurtis€M.€Lincoln,€Hendersonville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Margaret€Latham.Ð À&"& ÐÓ ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼A»XXE Ë #ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔÐ ˜(è#( ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼A»XXE ` #ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔÓ  Óà  àPlaintiff€Retail€Builders,€Inc.€(ð ðRBIðð),€is€a€construction€company€that€is€in€the€business€ofÐ p*À%* Ðbuilding€and€renovating€restaurants.€€Joseph€Embury€(ð ðEmburyðð)€is€the€president€of€RBI.€€In€someÐ \+¬&+ Ðâ âinstances,€RBI€€works€as€a€general€contractor,€participating€€in€the€actual€construction.€€In€otherÐ H,˜',ý Ðinstances,€RBI€provides€construction€management,€where€RBI€often€does€not€participate€in€theÐ ° Ðconstruction,€but€rather€coordinates€and€supervises€the€construction.€Ð œì Ðâ â€Ô#†¼A»XXE ¾ #ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔÐ ˆØ Ðà  àIn€1998,€Defendant/Appellee€Margaret€Latham€(ð ðLathamðð)€met€with€Embury€to€discussÐ tÄ ÐLatham€hiring€RBI€to€manage€the€construction€of€a€restaurant€called€ð ðThe€Light€House.ðð€€TheÐ `° Ðconstruction€project€became€known€as€ð ðThe€Light€House€Restaurant€Projectðð€(ð ðthe€Projectðð).€€Later,Ð L œ ÐEmbury€delivered€to€Latham€a€standardized€ð ðAIA€Documentðð׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†¼A»XXE h#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔ€Ô#†¼A»XXE Á#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔentitled€ð ðStandard€Form€ofÐ 8 ˆ ÐAgreement€Between€Owner€and€Construction€Manager,ðð€1991€Edition.Ô#†¼A»XXE #ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔ€€It€is€undisputed€that€neitherÐ $ t Ðparty€signed€the€AIA€document.Ô#†¼A»XXE »#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔ׃T×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ô#†¼A»XXE O#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔ€€Ô#†¼A»XXE ä#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔ€The€parties€dispute,€however,€whether€€Ô#†¼A»XXE (#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔhandwritten€notes€wereÐ  ` Ðadded€to€the€AIA€document€reflecting€Lathamððs€agreement€to€pay€RBI€10%€of€the€actual€cost€ofÐ ü L  Ðwork€performed€by€RBI€during€the€construction€of€the€Project€with€a€ð ð[g]uaranteed€maximum€priceÐ è 8  Ðunder€Amendment€1€Article€1.ðð€€Ô#†¼A»XXE ’#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔÐ Ô$  ÐÌà  àLatham€hired€Charles€Hasty€(ð ðHastyðð)€as€the€engineer€on€the€Project,€and€she€hired€TomÐ ¬ü  ÐAnderson€(ð ðArchitect€Andersonðð)€as€the€architect.€€She€contracted€with€both€Hasty€and€ArchitectÐ ˜è  ÐAnderson€to€pay€them€directly€for€their€servicesÔ#†¼A»XXE #ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔ.€€RBI€had€no€obligation€to€pay€for€the€services€ofÐ „Ô  Ðeither€Hasty€or€Architect€Anderson€out€of€the€construction€funds€it€was€to€receive.€Ð pÀ ÐÌÔ#†¼A»XXE ‹#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔà  àIn€approximately€May€1998,€Latham€sought€to€finalize€financing€for€the€Project.€€To€obtainÐ H˜ Ðthe€necessary€loan,€she€needed€a€document€to€present€to€the€First€Independent€Bank€(ð ðBankðð).€Ð 4„ ÐToward€this€end,€on€May€12,€1998,€before€plans€for€the€Project€were€completed,€the€parties€executedÐ  p Ða€one„page€standardized€document€entitled€ð ðAmendment€No.€1€To€Agreement€Between€Owner€andÐ  \ ÐConstruction€Managerðð€(ð ðAmendmentðð).€€The€Amendment€provided:Ð øH ÐÌà8  àPursuant€to€Paragraph€2.2€of€the€Agreement,€dated€May€12,€1998,€Margaret€LathamÐ Ð  Ðòò(Owner)€óóand€Retail€Builders,€Inc.òò€(Construction€Manager)óó,€for€The€Light€HouseÐ ¼  ÐRestaurant€Project€òò€(The€Project)óó,€the€Owner€and€Construction€Manager€establish€aÐ ¨ø ÐGuaranteed€Maximum€Price€and€Contract€Time€for€Work€as€set€forth€below:ДäÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à1.€$650,000.00€(Six€hundred€and€fifty€thousand€dollars)€guaranteedÐ €Ð Ðmaximum€price.Ðl¼` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à2.€€120€day€contract€time.€€€ÐX ¨` x` x ÐÌArticle€I€of€the€Amendment€contained€provisos€stating€that€ð ðContract€Documents€(plans)€notÐ 0"€  Ðcompleted,ðð€and€that€the€ð ðGuaranteed€maximum€price€[is]€based€on€incomplete€plans,€meetings€withÐ #l! ÐOwner€and€allowances€itemized€on€Exhibit€B.ðð€€Exhibit€B€is€a€list€of€nineteen€(19)€items€and€theÐ $X" Ðrespective€cost€allowance€for€those€items€totaling€$650,000.€€Exhibit€B€states€that€the€estimates€wereÐ ô$D # Ðbased€on€an€April€6,€1998€site€plan/landscape€plan€developed€by€Hasty,€on€preliminary€drawingsÐ à%0!$ Ðdone€by€Architect€Anderson€in€April€1998,€and€on€discussions€with€Latham.€€Included€in€the€list€ofÐ Ì&"% Ðitems€were€$57,000€in€profit€and€overhead€for€RBI€and€$21,000€for€contingencies.Ô#†¼A»XXE #ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔ€€The€AmendmentÐ ° Ðpurports€to€amend€an€ð ðAgreementðð€dated€May€12,€1998;€however,€there€is€no€signed€ð ðAgreementððÐ œì Ðin€the€record,€only€the€unsigned€AIA€document.€€No€other€written€instruments€were€signed€by€eitherÐ ˆØ Ðparty€at€any€time€before€or€during€construction.€€Ð tÄ Ѐ€Ð `° Ðà  àBased€in€part€on€the€Amendment,€Latham€obtained€a€$900,000€loan€from€the€Bank.€€The€loanÐ L œ Ðwas€comprised€of€two€parts€ð"ð€$650,000€for€construction,€and€$250,000€for€ð ðDesign,€Furniture,€andÐ 8 ˆ ÐEquipment.ðð׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Latham€was€responsible€for€administering€the€$250,000€portion€of€her€loan.€As€isÐ $ t Ðexplained€below,€the€Bank€administered€the€$650,000€upon€application€for€payment€from€RBI.ò ò€ó óÐ  ` ÐÌà  àArchitect€Andersonððs€first€set€of€architectural€plans€were€dated€May€20,€1998.€€Those€plansÐ ì <  Ðclassified€the€restaurant€as€a€Type€6€building,€which€can€be€composed€of€wood.€€However,€the€CityÐ Ø(  Ðof€Hendersonville€interpreted€its€building€codes€to€require€that€the€restaurant€be€a€Type€5€building,Ð Ä  Ðwhich€must€be€built€with€noncombustible€materials.€€In€light€of€this,€the€plans€were€modified€to€makeÐ °  Ðthe€structure€a€Type€5€building.€ò ò€ó óThough€RBI€would€later€claim€that€it€takes€longer€to€build€a€TypeÐ œì  Ð5€building,€no€changes€were€made€to€the€120„day€completion€time€set€out€in€the€Amendment.€€€Ð ŒÜ  ÐÌà  àIn€addition,€during€the€excavation€process,€€rock€was€discovered€where€the€foundation€of€theÐ d´ Ðbuilding€was€to€be€laid.€€Therefore,€to€avoid€having€to€blast€the€rock€to€make€way€for€the€foundation,Ð P  Ðthe€plans€were€modified€to€raise€the€structure€a€few€feet.€€€€€€€€Ð <Œ ÐÌà  àÔ#†¼A»XXE Ä!#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔOn€August€4,€1998,€the€building€permit€for€the€Project€was€issued,€and€constructionÐ d Ðcommenced€soon€thereafter.€€RBI,€as€the€construction€manager,€received€the€invoices€for€all€laborÐ P Ðand€materials€expended€on€the€Project.€€RBI€engaged€all€of€the€subcontractors€and€purchased€theÐ ì< Ðconstruction€materials€used€on€the€Project.€€As€indicated€above,€RBI€periodically€preparedÐ Ø( Ðdocuments€entitled€ð ðApplication€and€Certificate€for€Paymentðð€(ð ðapplication€for€paymentðð)€andÐ Ä Ðsubmitted€these€to€Latham,€the€architect,€and€the€Bank€for€approval€and€payment.€€Each€applicationÐ ° Ðfor€payment€recited€that€the€ð ðoriginal€contract€sumðð€was€$650,000.€€Each€application€for€paymentÐ œì Ðalso€listed€the€amount€completed,€the€amount€due,€and€the€remaining€balance€on€the€contract.€Ð ˆØ ÐAttached€to€each€application€was€a€continuation€sheet€with€a€list€of€nineteen€(19)€items€to€beÐ tÄ Ðcompleted€and€the€projected€cost€for€each€item€that€mirrored€Exhibit€B€of€the€Amendment.€€In€oneÐ ` ° Ðcolumn,€the€actual€amount€expended€on€each€item€was€listed.€€In€this€way,€the€actual€cost€of€theÐ L!œ ÐProject€could€be€compared€with€the€budgeted€price€as€of€the€date€of€each€application€for€payment.€Ð 8"ˆ  ÐUltimately,€RBI€submitted€eight€(8)€of€these€applications.€€Each€were€approved€by€the€architect€andÐ $#t! Ðwere€funded€by€the€Bank€€The€final€application,€dated€January€12,€1999,€€reflects€that€the€total€costÐ $`" Ðon€the€Project€was€$656,342,€and€that€there€was€no€balance€due€on€the€contract.€€à x àÐ ü$L # ÐÌà  àThe€restaurant€opened€ò òó óon€December€31,€1998.€€At€that€time,€there€were€a€few€remainingÐ Ô&$"% Ðminor€construction€items,€which€primarily€involved€landscaping.€€These€were€completed€by€JanuaryÐ À'#& Ð28,€1999.€€Ô#†¼A»XXE ä)#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔÐ ¬(ü#' ÐÐ ˜)è$( Ðà  àAfter€construction€was€completed,€RBI€requested€that€Latham€pay€for€additional€costsÐ ° Ðincurred€on€the€Project€substantially€over€and€above€the€$650,000€contract€price.€€Latham€had€paidÐ œì ÐRBI€a€little€over€$656,000,€and€shÔ#†¼A»XXE ý1#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔe€refused€to€pay€any€additional€amounts€for€the€cost€overruns,Ð ˆØ Ðrelying€on€the€ð ðmaximum€priceðð€of€$650,000€set€out€in€the€Amendment.Ô#†¼A»XXE w3#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔ׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àOn€June€20,€2002,€RBI€filed€this€lawsuit€against€Latham€for€breach€of€a€written€contract,Ð L œ Ðbreach€of€an€oral€contract,€breach€of€an€implied€contract€and€breach€of€the€obligation€to€deal€in€goodÐ 8 ˆ Ðfaith.€In€the€alternative,€RBI€sought€damages€based€on€òòquantum€meruitóó,€the€value€of€servicesÐ $ t Ðprovided.€€In€the€complaint,€RBI€alleged€that€Latham€was€repeatedly€informed€that€the€budgetÐ  ` Ðallowances€were€in€danger,€and€that€she€owed€RBI€for€the€cost€overruns.€€It€alleged€that€Ô#†¼A»XXE V4#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔsome€of€theÐ ü L  Ðadditional€costs€on€the€Project€resulted€from€unanticipated€factors,€such€as€the€change€in€buildingÐ è 8  Ðtype€required€by€the€cityððs€building€code€and€the€excess€rock€found€at€the€site€where€the€foundationÐ Ô$  Ðwas€to€be€laid.€€RBI€also€contended€that€additional€costs€arose€out€of€items€requested€by€LathamÐ À  Ðduring€construction€that€were€not€in€the€original€price,€such€as€furniture,€fixtures,€and€equipment.€Ð ¬ü  ÐRBI€asserted€as€well€that€its€labor€costs€increased€during€the€final€six€weeks€of€the€project,€becauseÐ ˜è  ÐLathamððs€accountant€had€insisted€that€the€restaurant€must€be€open€before€the€end€of€1998,€andÐ „Ô  Ðmeeting€this€deadline€required€that€crews€work€overtime.€€RBI€conceded€that€ð ð[n]o€written€changeÐ pÀ Ðorders€were€prepared€for€these€costs.ðð€€It€claimed,€however,€that€Latham€was€informed€of€and€hadÐ \¬ Ðapproved€all€of€the€additional€costs.€Ô#†¼A»XXE 77#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔRBI€asserted€that€the€cost€overruns€totaled€approximatelyÐ H˜ Ð$112,000;€however,€it€requested€$57,000,€the€amount€of€profit€originally€contemplated€in€theÐ 4„ Ðcontract,€plus€the€$30,000€that€was€spent€on€furniture,€fixtures,€and€equipment.€€On€September€9,Ð  p Ð2002,€Latham€filed€an€answer€and€a€counterclaim€for€damages€resulting€from€claimed€deficienciesÐ  \ Ðin€construction.Ð øH ÐÌà  àOn€January€26€and€27,€2004,€a€bench€trial€was€conducted€in€the€matter.€€Embury€testified€atÐ Ð  Ðtrial€about€his€dealings€with€Latham.€€He€said€that€he€helped€Latham€develop€her€concept€for€theÐ ¼  Ðrestaurant,€plan€the€layout,€and€develop€a€preliminary€budget.€€The€preliminary€budget€included€fourÐ ¨ø Ðcategories€of€expenses:€€construction€($511,773);€site€work€($96,320);€furniture,€fixtures,€andÐ ”ä Ðequipment,€also€called€ð ðF,€F,€and€Eðð€($247,700),€and€start€up€costs€($38,950),€which€totaled€anÐ €Ð Ðestimated€$894,743€for€the€entire€Project.€Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àEmbury€stated€that€he€told€Latham€that€his€price€for€the€Project€would€be€ten€percent€(10%)Ð D!” Ðof€the€actual€cost€of€construction.€€This€fee€was€reflected€in€the€standardized€AIA€document€that€heÐ 0"€  Ðgave€to€Latham,€which€he€claimed€he€reviewed€with€Latham€in€detail.€€Embury€recognized,€however,Ð #l! Ðthat€his€handwritten€notes€on€the€AIA€document€provided€for€a€guaranteed€maximum€price€ð ðunderÐ $X" ÐAmendment€I€Article€I.ððÐ ô$D # ÐÌà  àEmbury€testified€that€he€signed€the€Amendment€on€May€12,€1998,€in€order€to€accommodateÐ Ì&"% ÐLathamððs€need€to€have€a€contract€to€show€the€Bank€in€order€to€ð ðwrap€up€her€financing.ðð€€He€said€thatÐ ¸'#& Ðhe€explained€to€Latham€that€he€could€not€give€her€a€contract€cost€because€the€plans€were€notÐ ¤(ô#' Ðcomplete.€€Nevertheless,€Embury€testified,€Latham€insisted€that€Embury€provide€her€with€a€contractÐ )à$( Ðto€take€to€the€Bank.€€Because€of€Lathamððs€insistence,€Embury€said,€he€filled€out€the€Amendment,Ð ° Ðreflecting€a€maximum€guaranteed€price€of€$650,000,€but€he€qualified€the€price€by€adding€the€provisoÐ œì Ðthat€it€was€based€on€incomplete€plans.€€Exhibit€B,€Embury€explained,€was€an€itemization€of€theÐ ˆØ Ðconstruction€cost€allowances€based€on€Hastyððs€site€plan€developed€on€April€6,€1998,€as€well€asÐ tÄ ÐArchitect€Andersonððs€preliminary€drawings€of€the€plans€drawn€in€April€1998.òòóó€€The€$57,171€in€profitÐ `° Ðitemized€in€the€exhibit€was€10%€of€the€total€of€the€other€figures.€€Ô#†¼A»XXE ‚;#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔEmbury€said€that€he€reviewed€theÐ L œ Ðfirst€set€of€plans€with€Latham.€€He€said€that€the€cost€of€construction€was€increased€because€of€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðchange€in€the€plans€from€a€Type€6€building€to€a€Type€5€building.€€Embry€asserted€that€constructionÐ $ t Ðof€a€Type€5€building€was€more€labor€intensive€and€more€costly.€€He€maintained€that€he€explained€thisÐ  ` Ðdifference€in€cost€to€Latham,€and€that,€although€he€did€not€ð ðrecall€her€reaction,€.€.€.€the€indication€wasÐ ü L  Ðwe€were€to€proceed.ðð€€Embury€was€not€aware€of€any€discussions€between€Latham€and€ArchitectÐ è 8  ÐAnderson€regarding€the€change€in€the€building€type.€€€The€final€plans€were€completed€on€June€9,Ð Ô$  Ð1998.Ð À  ÐÌà  àEmbury€also€testified€about€the€rock€in€the€foundation€site€that€was€discovered€soon€afterÐ ˜è  Ðexcavation€began.€€He€said€that€Latham€was€called€to€the€site€to€see€the€problem€and€discussÐ „Ô  Ðalternative€solutions.€€Ultimately,€€it€was€decided€that€raising€the€elevation€of€the€restaurant€buildingÐ pÀ Ðwould€be€less€costly€than€blasting€the€rock€to€lay€the€foundation.€€Therefore,€the€building€wasÐ \¬ Ðelevated,€and€the€front€porch€was€converted€from€a€concrete€slab€to€an€elevated€wooden€deck.€Ð H˜ ÐEmbury€estimated€that€the€additional€cost€to€raise€the€building€was€about€$23,000.€€€Embury€said€thatÐ 4„ ÐLatham€was€made€aware€of€the€changes€and€was€told€that€ð ðit€will€cost€more€money.ðð€€LathamÐ  p Ðresponded€by€ð ðnodding€and€what€we€took€to€be€ð!ð€go€ahead€and€do€it.ðð€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àEmbury€also€claimed€that€Latham€agreed€to€pay€for€the€millwork€provided€by€subcontractorsÐ ä4 Ðon€the€project.€€He€noted€that€there€was€no€item€in€Exhibit€B€indicating€that€RBI€had€a€commitmentÐ Ð  Ðto€provide€the€millwork,€or€ð ðF,€F,€and€E,ðð€a€reference€to€furniture,€fixtures€and€equipment,€whichÐ ¼  Ðð ðcan€include€everything€from€a€hostess€counter€to€ð"ð€to€bars.ðð€€Embury€said€that€he€had€discussedÐ ¨ø Ðthe€matter€with€Latham€and€had€explained€to€her€that€she€could€get€those€items€at€a€lower€price€byÐ ”ä Ðdealing€directly€with€a€cabinet€maker.€€He€said€that€Latham€agreed€to€do€so€and€indicated€that€sheÐ €Ð Ðwould€also€bid€out€the€cabinetry€and€the€doors.€€Later,€however,€Latham€was€unable€to€get€bids€forÐ l¼ Ðthe€millwork,€so€she€asked€Embury€to€ð ðdo€the€millwork€and€bars€and€such€as€that.ðð€€The€additionalÐ X ¨ Ðmillwork,€Embury€stated,€involved€other€items€dictated€by€an€interior€decorator€hired€by€Latham,Ð D!” Ðsuch€as€false€beams€on€the€ceiling€and€special€paneling€on€the€walls.€€Ô#†¼A»XXE ¸F#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔEmbury€said€that€he€remindedÐ 0"€  ÐLatham€that€the€millwork€was€not€part€of€their€contract,€and€that€there€was€no€money€in€their€contractÐ #l! Ðfor€building€the€bars€and€the€other€items.€€Embury€testified€that€Latham€responded,€€ð ðthe€bank€willÐ $X" Ðonly€loan€me€$650,000.ðð€€Embury€said€that€Latham€ð ðagreed€we€needed€to€go€ahead€and€do€it.ððÐ ô$D # ÐÌà  àLatham€also€needed€to€buy€equipment€for€the€restaurant.€€Embury€testified€that€she€asked€him€Ð Ì&"% Ðwhether€he€worked€with€any€equipment€companies.€€Embury€recommended€that€Latham€contact€EdÐ ¸'#& ÐCampbell,€an€equipment€dealer,€who€had€worked€on€other€projects€with€Embury.€€Campbell€was€paidÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdirectly€by€Latham,€not€by€RBI.€€Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àEmbury€testified€about€other€changes€that€were€made€during€construction€that€he€allegedÐ ° Ðâ âincreased€costs€and€were€approved€by€Latham.€€He€said€that€the€initial€plans€showed€multi„panelÐ œì Ðwindows€across€the€front€of€the€elevation€of€the€building;€these€were€changed€to€French€doors.€€TheÐ ˆØ Ðoriginal€plans€included€a€stairwell€from€the€kitchen€to€the€basement;€later€plans€eliminated€thoseÐ tÄ Ðstairs,€resulting€in€increased€cost.€€Because€of€the€rock€in€the€ground€where€the€foundation€was€toÐ `° Ðbe,€running€the€sewer€and€water€lines€involved€an€added€expense.€€Unidentified€factors€alsoÐ L œ Ðcontributed€to€costs€that€were€added€to€the€electrical€contract.€€In€addition,€in€December€1998,€shortlyÐ 8 ˆ Ðbefore€the€restaurant€was€scheduled€to€open,€inclement€weather€and€below€freezing€temperaturesÐ $ t Ðhalted€progress€on€the€landscaping€and€paving.€€Consequently,€to€enable€the€restaurant€to€open€priorÐ  ` Ðto€the€end€of€the€year,€RBI€posted€a€$45,000€cashierððs€check€with€the€City€for€a€temporary€use€andÐ ü L  Ðoccupancy€permit.€The€check€was€released€after€sixty€(60)€days.€€Embury€asserted€that€Latham€wasÐ è 8  Ðinformed€about€the€additional€costs€related€to€all€of€these€items,€and€said€in€fact€that€several€of€theÐ Ô$  Ðchanges€were€dictated€by€Latham€or€her€management€team.€€€€€€€€€Ð À  ÐÌÔ#†¼A»XXE DR#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔà  àEmbury€compiled€a€list€of€the€extra€costs€on€the€Project€that€were€caused€by€the€variousÐ ˜è  Ðcircumstances€described€in€his€testimony.€€They€are€as€follows:Ð „Ô  ÐÌà8  à1.€€Site€Costsà0¸ Ð Ð àà0¸ Ð ¸ Ð àà0hÐ Ð àà0ÀhÐ hÐ àà0ÀÐ ÀÐ àà0pÐ Ð àà0ÈpÐ pÐ à$16,779Ð\¬ÈÐ ÈÐ  Ðà8  à2.€€Additional€landscaping€and€changes€to€landscapingà0ÈÐ Ð à$2,430ÐH˜ÈÐ ÈÐ  Ðà8  à3.€€Rock€at€footings/drilling/rock€removal€à  àà0pÐ Ð àà0ÈpÐ pÐ à$23,677Ð4„ÈÐ ÈÐ  Ðà8  à4.€€Structural€steel€changesà0hÐ Ð àà0ÀhÐ hÐ àà0ÀÐ ÀÐ àà0pÐ Ð àà0ÈpÐ pÐ à$450Ð pÈÐ ÈÐ  Ðà8  à5.€€Addððl€labor€and€materials€required€by€ð ðtype€changeððà0ÈÐ Ð à$14,433Ð \ÈÐ ÈÐ  Ðà8  à6.€€Changes€of€window€to€French€doorsà0Ð Ð àà0pÐ Ð àà0ÈpÐ pÐ à$419ÐøHÈÐ ÈÐ  Ðà8  à7.€€Plumbing€changesà0Ð Ð àà0hÐ Ð àà0ÀhÐ hÐ àà0ÀÐ ÀÐ àà0pÐ Ð àà0ÈpÐ pÐ à$4,150Ðä4ÈÐ ÈÐ  Ðà8  à8.€€Electrical€changesà0Ð Ð àà0hÐ Ð àà0ÀhÐ hÐ àà0ÀÐ ÀÐ àà0pÐ Ð àà0ÈpÐ pÐ à$4,135ÐÐ ÈÐ ÈÐ  Ðà8  à9.€€Change€of€entrance€to€wooden€deckà0Ð Ð àà0pÐ Ð àà0ÈpÐ pÐ à$3,815м ÈÐ ÈÐ  Ðà8  à10.€€General€condition€additions€such€as€insurance,€Ð¨øÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àsupervision,€overtime,€bonding,€and€clean€up€laborà È à$8,740Ð ”ä Ðà8  à11.€€Furniture/fixture/equipment€and€decorà0Ð Ð àà0pÐ Ð àà0ÈpÐ pÐ à$30,603€€€€€€€€Ð€ÐÈÐ ÈÐ  ÐÌThese€additional€costs€totaled€$109,109,631.ò ò€€ó óEmbury€testified€that€the€amounts€claimed€by€RBI€forÐ X ¨ Ðthe€extra€costs€were€reasonable.Ð H!˜ ЀÌà  àEmbury€also€identified€the€eight€applications€for€payment€submitted€by€RBI,€which€wereÐ  #p! Ðadmitted€into€evidence.€€He€said€that€they€were€generated€in€his€office€as€the€invoices€arrived€in€hisÐ  $\" Ðoffice€for€payment.€€Embury€sent€copies€of€the€applications€to€Latham€for€her€records,€to€ArchitectÐ ø$H # ÐAnderson€for€approval,€and€to€the€Bank€for€payment.€€€Ð ä%4!$ ÐÌà  àThe€last€application€for€payment€was€dated€January€12,€1999.€€It€included€the€same€listingÐ ¼' #& Ðof€items€as€in€the€other€applications,€except€that€it€included€two€additional€items:€Equipment€andÐ ¨(ø#' ÐFurniture.€€These€items€were€not€included€in€the€original€list,€and€therefore€no€amount€was€budgetedÐ ”)ä$( Ðfor€them.€€In€the€January€1999€application,€RBI€charged€Latham€$6,527€for€ð ðEquipment,ðð€andÐ €*Ð%) Ð$22,239€for€ð ðFurnitureðð€according€to€this€application.€€This€application€also€reflected€that€RBI€hadÐ l+¼&* Ðearned€$57,053€for€ð ðProfit€and€Overhead,ðð€out€of€a€budgeted€$57,171,€during€the€course€of€theÐ ° ÐProject.€€The€January€1999€application€for€payment€showed€that€the€total€amount€to€be€paid€to€RBIÐ œì Ðwas€$656,342,€that€there€were€no€change€orders,€and€that€there€was€no€balance€due€on€the€contract.€Ð ˆØ ÐEmbury€conceded€that€he€did€not€have€any€diÔ#†¼A»XXE Ó[#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔscussions€with€Latham€about€the€increased€costs€whenÐ tÄ Ðshe€was€sent€this€last€application€for€payment,€but€insisted€that€they€had€previously€ð ðhad€some€prettyÐ `° Ðserious€discussions€about€where€the€price€of€the€project€was€going.ðð€€Embury€said€that€LathamÐ L œ Ðindicated€that€the€Bank€would€lend€only€$650,000€for€construction,€and€commented€that€perhaps€sheÐ 8 ˆ Ðcould€sell€some€of€her€property€or€get€money€from€her€retirement€fund€to€pay€the€costs€over€thatÐ $ t Ðamount.€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àEmbury€testified€that,€after€the€January€12,€1999€final€application€for€payment€was€submitted,Ð è 8  Ðanother€$68,207€in€invoices€on€the€Project€were€received€and€paid€by€RBI€out€of€RBIððs€funds.€Ð Ô$  ÐEmbury€submitted€into€evidence€a€document,€Exhibit€19,€listing€the€invoices€that€were€paid€afterÐ À  ÐJanuary€12,€1999€by€RBI.€€At€the€trial,€RBI€was€prepared€to€offer€some,€but€not€all,€of€the€invoicesÐ ¬ü  Ðto€corroborate€its€payment€of€those€amounts.€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àThrough€Embury,€RBI€proffered€as€evidence€a€letter€dated€March€4,€1999€from€Embury€toÐ pÀ ÐLatham.€€RBI€claimed€the€letter€demonstrated€that€Latham€had€agreed€to€pay€RBI€an€additionalÐ \¬ Ð$80,113€over€and€above€the€$650,000€in€twelve€(12)€payments€of€$6,676.08.€€RBI€contended€thatÐ H˜ ÐLatham€had€stopped€these€monthly€payments€after€making€the€first€payment.€€Latham€objected€to€theÐ 4„ Ðadmission€of€the€letter€into€evidence.€€The€trial€court€concluded€that€the€March€4,€1999€letter€was€anÐ  p Ðattempt€at€compromise€and€settlement,€and€disallowed€its€admission€into€evidence€on€that€basis.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àLatham€also€testified€at€trial.€€She€said€that€when€she€began€talking€with€Embury€about€RBIÐ ä4 Ðmanaging€the€construction€of€the€restaurant,€€she€discussed€with€him€the€difference€in€a€cost„plusÐ Ð  Ðcontract€and€a€guaranteed€price€contract.€€She€said€that€Embury€told€her€that€a€cost„plus€contractÐ ¼  Ðcould€potentially€be€less€expensive,€but€she€nevertheless€chose€the€fixed€price€contract.€€LathamÐ ¨ø Ðreceived€the€standardized€AIA€document€from€Embury,€but€she€said€he€did€not€go€over€it€with€herÐ ”ä Ðand€she€did€not€recall€any€handwritten€notes€on€her€copy.€€Latham€said€that€she€signed€theÐ €Ð ÐAmendment€because€it€contained€the€guaranteed€maximum€price€of€$650,000,€and€that€she€neverÐ l¼ Ðexpected€that€she€would€owe€RBI€more€than€that€amount.€€She€maintained€that€she€never€receivedÐ X ¨ Ðfrom€RBI€any€change€orders,€invoices,€or€other€documents€during€construction,€other€than€theÐ D!” Ðapplications€for€payment€with€the€continuation€sheets€attached.€€Latham€received€all€eightÐ 0"€  Ðapplications€for€payment.€€She€pointed€out€in€her€testimony€that€the€applications€for€payment€showedÐ #l! Ðthat€her€cost€stayed€below€the€maximum€price€of€$650,000€until€the€final€application€in€JanuaryÐ $X" Ð1999.€Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àLatham€testified€that,€during€the€course€of€construction€of€the€restaurant,€Embury€assured€her€Ð Ì&"% Ðthat€the€Project€was€within€budget,€saying,€ð ð[i]tððs€looking€good.€€It€looks€like€weððre€coming€inÐ ¸'#& Ðunder.ðð€€She€acknowledged€that€Embury€told€her€that€changes€needed€to€be€made,€but€said€that€heÐ ¤(ô#' Ðindicated€that€the€changes€would€save€her€money.€€Ô#†¼A»XXE Xj#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔLatham€claimed€that€she€did€not€become€awareÐ )à$( Ðthat€Embury€wanted€to€be€paid€more€than€the€$650,000€maximum€price€until€December€1998,€whenÐ |*Ì%) Ðhe€ð ðstarted€hinting€.€.€.€it€might€be€a€little€bit€over,€but€he€never€did€say€how€much.ðð€€She€said€thatÐ h+¸&* ÐEmbury€finally€told€her€how€much€she€was€over€the€$650,000€maximum€in€late€February€or€MarchÐ ° Ð1999.€€Latham€claimed€that,€if€she€had€known€about€the€overage€during€construction,€she€would€haveÐ œì Ðcut€items€from€the€Project€to€keep€it€from€going€over€budget.€€Latham€said€that,€prior€to€trial,€she€hadÐ ˆØ Ðnot€seen€the€list€of€cost€changes€compiled€by€Embury€and€introduced€into€evidence,€nor€had€she€seenÐ tÄ Ðthe€March€4,€1999€letter€purportedly€sent€to€her€by€Embury.€€After€the€lawsuit€was€filed,€RBI€sentÐ `° Ðcounsel€for€Latham€some€of€the€invoices€reflecting€costs€on€the€Project,€which€totaled€$279,597.85.€Ô#†¼A»XXE ùx#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔÐ L œ ÐÌÔ#†¼A»XXE '}#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔà  àLathamò ò€ó ótestified€that€she€assumed€that,€whether€the€restaurant€was€classified€as€a€Type€6€orÐ $ t ÐType€5€building,€it€would€be€built€with€fireproof€material,€and€indicated€that€she€did€not€discuss€withÐ  d ÐEmbury€any€increase€in€price€associated€with€the€change€in€the€building€type.€€With€respect€to€theÐ  P  Ðrock€discovered€where€the€foundation€was€to€be€laid,€Latham€said€that€Embury€told€her€that€sheÐ ì <  Ðcould€save€between€$20,000€and€$30,000€in€blasting€costs€by€elevating€the€restaurant€a€few€feet.€€SheÐ Ø(  Ðconceded€that€Embury€indicated€that€there€would€be€difficulties€in€underground€plumbing,€butÐ Ä  Ðasserted€that€he€later€told€her€that€he€had€figured€out€a€way€to€work€around€it.€€Latham€insisted€thatÐ °  ÐEmbury€did€not€tell€her€that€the€problems€with€the€rock€would€cause€her€to€owe€him€more€than€theÐ œì  Ðmaximum€price.€€In€fact,€she€stated,€the€$21,000€contingency€in€the€budget€was€based€on€the€fact€thatÐ ˆØ  Ðrock€was€discovered,€and€this€amount€was€intended€to€cover€the€related€costs.€€By€choosing€not€toÐ tÄ Ðblast€the€rock,€Latham€thought€that€this€contingency€money€could€be€used€for€other€items.Ð `° ÐÌà  àLatham€said€that€her€decorator€did€some€of€the€work€on€the€bartops,€and€that€RBI€finishedÐ 8ˆ Ðthem€by€laminating€them.€€Latham€paid€her€interior€decorator€directly.€€Because€finishing€the€bartopsÐ $t Ðwas€in€the€original€plans,€she€assumed€that€this€would€be€RBIððs€responsibility.Ð ` ÐÌà  àLatham€said€that€there€were€certain€expenses€that€she€was€not€told€she€would€have€to€pay€overÐ è8 Ðand€above€the€maximum€$650,000,€such€as€costs€for€the€architect,€the€engineer,€a€sewer€tap€and€aÐ Ô$ Ðfire€hydrant,€which€cost€about€$43,000.€€Latham€testified€that€she€paid€those€expenses€out€of€theÐ À Ð$650,000€loan,€and€consequently€had€to€make€the€final€payments€to€RBI€out€of€her€personal€checkingÐ ¬ü Ðaccounts.€€In€June€1999,€Latham€wrote€Embury€a€note€telling€him€that€she€did€not€intend€to€make€anyÐ ˜è Ðmore€payments€to€RBI€over€the€contract€price.€€Ô#†¼A»XXE }#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔÐ „Ô ÐÌà  àOn€cross€examination,€Latham€was€asked€about€the€Amendment€she€signed€and€whether€sheÐ \ ¬ Ðwas€aware€of€the€proviso€that€the€stated€maximum€guaranteed€price€was€based€on€incomplete€plans.€Ð H!˜ ÐShe€said€that,€at€the€time€she€signed€the€Amendment,€she€ð ðdidnððt€really€readðð€the€provision€statingÐ 4"„  Ðthat€the€plans€were€incomplete,€and€said€that€Embury€did€not€tell€her€that€the€maximum€price€wasÐ  #p! Ðbased€on€incomplete€plans.€€Latham€said€that€she€told€Embury€at€the€time€that€she€hadÔ#†¼A»XXE dž#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔ€only€$650,000Ð  $\" Ðfor€construction.€€She€suggested€in€her€testimony€that€Embury€could€have€added€the€ð ðincompleteÐ ø$H # Ðplansðð€language€to€the€Amendment€after€she€signed€it,€but€admitted€that€the€first€set€of€plans€wasÐ ä%4!$ Ðdated€May€20,€1998,€one€week€after€the€Amendment€was€signed.€€She€€was€asked€about€a€separateÐ Ð& "% Ðcontinuation€sheet€submitted€to€the€Bank€in€support€of€the€$250,000€portion€of€her€loan€designatedÐ ¼' #& Ðfor€ð ðDesign,€Furniture€and€Equipment.ðð€€She€recognized€that€the€continuation€sheet€showed€that€theÐ ¨(ø#' Ðarchitect,€engineer,€kitchen€equipment,€and€furniture€were€to€be€paid€from€the€$250,000,€not€fromÐ ”)ä$( Ðthe€$650,000€loan€designated€for€construction.€€When€asked€about€the€bar,€booths,€hostess€stand,€andÐ €*Ð%) Ðother€similar€items€that€RBI€completed,€Latham€said€that,€because€these€items€were€built€into€theÐ l+¼&* Ðfloor,€she€thought€that€they€were€part€of€the€building.€Latham€maintained€that€she€did€not€rememberÐ ° ÐEmbury€telling€her€that€she€would€owe€him€separately€for€that€work.Ð œì ÐÌà  àLatham€testified€that€she€needed€more€equipment,€and€that€Embury€sought€to€obtain€it€fromÐ tÄ ÐEd€Campbell€in€South€Carolina.€€She€agreed€that€Embury€was€not€responsible€for€getting€equipment.€Ð `° ÐÌ€Ô#†¼A»XXE V‰#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔà  àTom€Anderson,€the€architect€on€the€Project,€testified€as€well.€€Architect€Anderson€confirmedÐ 8 ˆ Ðthat€he€changed€the€architectural€plans€to€make€the€restaurant€building€a€Type€5€building,€rather€thanÐ $ t Ða€Type€6,€but€he€was€unsure€about€the€cost€difference.€€When€rock€was€discovered€on€the€job€site,Ð  ` Ðwhere€the€foundation€was€to€be€laid,€Architect€Anderson€discussed€the€situation€with€Embury,€butÐ ü L  Ðnot€with€Latham.€€He€testified€that€the€Project€was€completed€in€a€workmanlike€fashion€andÐ è 8  Ðaccording€to€the€requirements€and€specifications€of€the€plans€that€he€drew.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àEd€Anderson€(ð ðEd€Andersonðð),€RBIððs€construction€superintendent,€also€testified€at€trial.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€HeÐ ¬ü  Ðstated€that€his€job€was€to€oversee€the€contractors€on€the€construction€of€the€Project.€€Ed€AndersonÐ ˜è  Ðtestified€about€some€of€the€cost€increases€associated€with€constructing€a€Type€5€building€as€opposedÐ „Ô  Ðto€a€Type€6€building.€€He€stated€that€using€the€metal€studs€necessary€for€the€Type€5€building€structureÐ pÀ Ðtook€more€time€to€install€than€those€used€in€a€Type€6€structure.€€Though€he€did€not€know€the€costÐ \¬ Ðeffect€of€the€building€type€change€in€this€Project,€he€said€that€in€other€jobs€he€had€worked€on,€itÐ H˜ Ðwould€double€the€cost€of€construction.€€Ed€Anderson€testified€that€he€was€on€the€jobsite€every€day,Ð 4„ Ðand€that€he€was€aware€of€the€conversations€between€Embury€and€Latham.€€Because€LathamððsÐ  p Ðbusiness€was€just€down€the€road,€Embury€would€go€talk€to€Latham€whenever€an€issue€needed€to€beÐ  \ Ðaddressed.׃T×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€€recalled€the€problem€with€the€rock€on€the€site,€and€noted€that€Latham€was€aware€ofÐ øH Ðthe€problem.€€Ed€Anderson€testified€that,€as€the€construction€continued,€Latham€asked€RBI€to€buildÐ ä4 Ðcustom€bars€upstairs€and€downstairs,€install€booths,€decorate,€hang€pictures,€and€other€such€tasks.€Ð Ð  ÐEd€Anderson€did€not€know€whether€those€tasks€were€contemplated€in€the€original€contract.€€HeÐ ¼  Ðasserted€that€a€good€deal€of€overtime€was€worked€on€the€Project€in€an€effort€to€open€the€restaurantÐ ¨ø Ðby€the€end€of€1998.€€Like€Architect€Anderson,€Ed€Anderson€believed€construction€on€the€Project€wasÐ ”ä Ðdone€in€a€workmanlike€fashion€consistent€with€the€plans€and€specifications.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€deposition€of€equipment€dealer€Edward€C.€Campbell€(ð ðCampbellðð)€was€admitted€intoÐ X ¨ Ðevidence€to€show€his€involvement€in€the€project.׃¤×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Campbell€testified€that€he€had€worked€withÐ D!” ÐEmbury€on€projects€in€the€past,€and€that€Embury€had€contacted€him€to€obtain€some€kitchenÐ 0"€  Ðequipment€for€the€Light€House€Project.€€Campbell€had€a€couple€of€meetings€with€Latham€and€thenÐ #l! Ðwith€the€general€manager€of€the€restaurant,€Travis€Roberts€(ð ðRobertsðð).€€Eventually,€he€sold€LathamÔ#†¼A»XXE :#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔÐ $X" Ðabout€$120,000€worth€of€equipment.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€said€that€the€vent€hoods€were€furnished€by€RBI.€He€alsoÐ ° Ðstated€that€RBI€installed€the€equipment€because€he,€Campbell,€was€too€expensive€and€Embury€hadÐ œì Ðemployees€who€could€do€it.€€Campbell€said€that€the€price€of€the€equipment€did€not€includeÐ ˆØ Ðinstallation€costs.€€€€€€€€€€€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àOn€March€10,€2004,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€finding€in€favor€of€Latham€and€againstÐ L œ ÐRBI€on€its€complaint.€€The€trial€court€stated,€ð ðThe€Court€specifically€finds€that€the€contract€was€aÐ 8 ˆ Ðfixed€price€construction€contract,€the€Plaintiff€gave€continuous€assurances,€both€orally€and€byÐ $ t Ðdocumentation,€and€allegations€by€Plaintiff€of€extras€or€additions€was€not€shown€by€a€preponderanceÐ  ` Ðof€the€evidence€in€light€of€the€exhibits€and€testimony.ðð€€The€trial€court€later€amended€its€order€toÐ ü L  Ðconfirm€that€it€was€also€dismissing€Lathamððs€counterclaim.€€From€that€order,€RBI€now€appeals.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€RBI€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€concluding€that€the€parties€had€entered€intoÐ À  Ða€fixed€price€construction€contract.€€RBI€contends€that€the€Amendment€was€too€indefinite€as€toÐ ¬ü  Ðmaterial€terms€to€be€enforceable,€and€notes€that€the€parties€did€not€execute€any€other€writtenÐ ˜è  Ðagreement.€RBI€claims€that€the€Amendment€could€not€be€considered€a€final€contract,€because€itÐ „Ô  Ðprovides€specifically€that€it€was€based€on€plans€that€had€not€been€completed.€€RBI€also€argues€thatÐ pÀ Ðthe€proof€shows€that€it€incurred€$30,000€in€expenses€on€furniture,€fixtures,€and€equipment€whichÐ \¬ Ðwere€beyond€the€scope€originally€contemplated€by€RBI€and€Latham.€€Because€there€was€noÐ H˜ Ðenforceable€contract,€RBI€argues,€the€trial€court€should€have€imposed€a€quasi„contractual€obligationÐ 4„ Ðupon€Latham€to€pay€RBI€a€reasonable€amount€to€prevent€unjust€enrichment.€€RBI€contends€thatÐ  p Ðadditional€compensation€in€the€amount€of€$80,113€would€be€reasonable€compensation.€€RBI€furtherÐ  \ Ðargues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€disallowing€the€admission€into€evidence€of€the€March€1999€letter,Ð øH Ðin€which€RBI€Ô#†¼A»XXE Àœ#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔclaims€that€Latham€agreed€that€she€should€pay€RBI€$80,113€for€the€additional€goodsÐ ä4 Ðand€services€provided€by€RBI.€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àIn€response,€Latham€argues€that€the€Amendment€constituted€the€partiesðð€agreement,€and€thatÐ ¨ø Ðthe€guaranteed€maximum€price€of€$650,000€is€enforceable.€€She€further€argues€that,€even€if€there€wasÐ ”ä Ðno€written€contract€between€the€parties,€there€was€an€oral€agreement€that€RBI€perform€its€servicesÐ €Ð Ðfor€a€guaranteed€maximum€price€of€$650,000,€as€is€evidenced€by€the€Amendment€and€by€RBIððsÐ l¼ Ðapplications€for€payment.€€Moreover,€even€if€no€contract€existed€between€the€parties,€LathamÐ X ¨ Ðcontends,€the€approximately€$657,000€that€she€has€already€paid€RBI€is€more€than€reasonableÐ D!” Ðcompensation€for€RBIððs€services.€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àWe€review€the€trial€courtððs€factual€findings€òòde€novoóó€on€the€record,€presuming€those€findingsÐ $X" Ðto€be€correct€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€otherwise.€€Ô#†¼A»XXE ݦ#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔWe€review€questions€of€law€òòde€novoóó,€withÐ ô$D # Ðno€such€presumption€of€correctness.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d);€òòò òsee€Strickland€v.€Cartwrightó óóó,€117Ð à%0!$ ÐS.W.3d€766,€771€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2003)Ô#†¼A»XXE v«#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔ.€Ô#†¼A»XXE Ÿ¬#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔò òòòó óóóÐ Ì&"% ÐÌà  àOur€Supreme€Court€has€explained€that€a€contract€must€be€sufficiently€definite€in€order€to€beÐ ¤(ô#' Ðenforced:€€€€€€€€€€Ð )à$( Їà8  àA€contract€must€result€from€a€meeting€of€the€minds€of€the€parties€in€mutual€assent€toÐ ° Ðthe€terms,€must€be€based€upon€a€sufficient€consideration,€free€from€fraud€or€undueÐ œì Ðinfluence,€not€against€public€policy€and€sufficiently€definite€to€be€enforced.€Ð ˆØ ÐIndefiniteness€regarding€an€essential€element€of€a€contract€may€prevent€the€creationÐ tÄ Ðof€an€enforceable€contract.€A€contract€must€be€of€sufficient€explicitness€so€that€aÐ `° Ðcourt€can€perceive€what€are€the€respective€obligations€of€the€parties.€ÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌò òòòDoe€v.€HCA€Health€Services€of€Tenn.,€Inc.óóó ó,€46€S.W.3d€191,€196€(Tenn.€2001)€(citations€andÐ $ t Ðquotations€omitted).€€In€determining€whether€the€parties€mutually€assented€to€the€terms€of€a€contract,Ð  ` Ðð ðcourts€must€apply€an€objective€standard€based€on€the€partiesðð€manifestations.ðð€€ò òòòStaubach€RetailÐ ü L  ÐServs.„Southeast,€LLC€v.€H.G.€Hill€Realty€Co.ó óóó,€160€S.W.3d€521,€524€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2005).€€ð ð[T]heÐ è 8  Ðlaw€leans€against€the€destruction€of€contracts€for€uncertainty,€especially€where€one€of€the€parties€Ô#†¼A»XXE ã¬#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔhasÐ Ô$  Ðperformed€his€part€of€the€contract.ðð€òòò òBook-Mart€of€Florida,€Inc.€v.€Natððl€Book€Warehouse,€Inc.ó óóó,€917Ð À  ÐS.W.2d€691,€694€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995);€òòò òsee€APCO€Amusement€Co.€v.€Wilkins€Family€Rests.€ofÐ ¬ü  ÐAm.,€Inc.ó óóó,€673€S.W.2d€523,€528€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984).Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àWe€must€first€determine€what,€if€any,€contract€existed€between€the€parties,€using€an€objectiveÐ pÀ Ðstandard€based€on€the€partiesðð€manifestations.€€We€look€first€to€the€Amendment,€which€provides€that,Ð \¬ Ðbased€on€incomplete€plans,€RBI€will€manage€the€construction€of€the€Project€for€Latham€for€aÐ H˜ Ðguaranteed€maximum€price€of€$650,000.€€Exhibit€B€to€the€Amendment€lists€the€items€considered€inÐ 4„ Ðthe€maximum€price€and€includes€RBIððs€ð ðProfit€and€Overheadðð€and€contingencies.€€Notably,€theÐ  p Ðð ðAmendmentðð€does€not€actually€amend€any€other€valid€contract,€so€its€terms€are€limited€to€thoseÐ  \ Ðstated€therein.€€Subsequent€to€the€execution€of€the€Amendment,€the€building€type€was€changed,€rockÐ øH Ðwas€discovered€where€the€foundation€was€to€be€laid,€and€other€changes€arose€that€affected€theÐ ä4 Ðoriginally€anticipated€cost€of€the€Project.€€Nevertheless,€even€after€these€problems€arose€and€the€plansÐ Ð  Ðhad€long€been€finalized,€RBI€sent€out€eight€applications€for€payment,€all€reconfirming€that€theÐ ¼  Ðcontract€price€for€construction€of€the€Project€was€$650,000,€that€there€were€no€change€orders,€andÐ ¨ø Ðthat€RBI€was€expected€to€pay€for€the€items€listed€in€Exhibit€B€of€the€Amendment.€€€€€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àThe€partiesðð€testimony€regarding€the€oral€representations€of€Embury€and€Latham€wasÐ l¼ Ðcontradictory.€€Embury€testified€that€every€time€a€change€increasing€the€price€of€constructionÐ X ¨ Ðoccurred,€he€informed€Latham€that€there€would€be€a€price€increase€and€Latham€nevertheless€directedÐ D!” Ðhim€to€proceed.€€Latham€disputed€this,€testifying€that€Embury€did€not€tell€her€that€any€of€the€changes€Ð 0"€  Ðwould€result€in€a€higher€contract€price€for€her.€€Rather,€she€said,€Embury€indicated€that€the€changesÐ #l! Ðin€the€construction€would€save€her€money.€€Moreover,€€Embury€concedes€that€he€never€discussedÐ $X" Ðspecific€amounts€with€Latham€during€construction,€and€that€Latham€did€not€specifically€state€thatÐ ô$D # Ðshe€agreed€to€pay€for€items€that€would€result€in€a€contract€price€in€excess€of€$650,000.€€€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àTo€the€extent€that€the€partiesðð€testimony€is€contradictory,€we€must€assume€that€the€trial€courtÐ ¸'#& Ðimplicitly€credited€Lathamððs€testimony.€€The€trial€courtððs€assessment€of€the€credibility€of€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðwitnesses€is,€of€course,€accorded€great€deference€on€appeal.€ò òòò€See€Mitchell€v.€Archiboldó óóó,€971€S.W.Ð )à$( Ð2d€25,€29€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998).€€With€appropriate€deference€to€the€trial€courtððs€implicitÐ |*Ì%) Ðdeterminations€of€credibility,€€we€must€conclude€that€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€theÐ h+¸&* Ðfinding€that€the€parties€entered€into€a€contract€for€the€construction€of€the€Project€for€a€guaranteedÐ ° Ðmaximum€price€of€$650,000,€which€included€the€items€listed€in€Exhibit€B€of€the€Amendment.€€InÐ œì Ðaddition€to€the€terms€set€out€in€the€Amendment,€the€subsequent€conduct€of€the€parties€was€consistentÐ ˆØ Ðwith€those€stated€terms€that€RBI€agree€to€manage€the€construction€of€the€Project€for€a€maximumÐ tÄ Ðprice€of€$650,000.€€Each€of€the€eight€applications€for€payment,€generated€by€RBI,€list€the€contractÐ `° Ðprice€as€$650,000,€and€stated€that€there€were€no€change€orders€during€construction.€€The€onlyÐ L œ Ðevidence€contrary€to€such€an€agreement€is€Emburyððs€testimony€that€he€informed€Latham€periodicallyÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€cost€increases,€and€that€she€indicated€to€him€that€the€Project€should€proceed€despite€the€increaseÐ $ t Ðin€cost.€€However,€as€noted€above,€Latham€never€specifically€agreed€to€pay€RBI€an€amount€overÐ  ` Ð$650,000,€no€change€orders€were€ever€signed,€and€there€is€no€testimony€that€Embury€ever€discussedÐ ü L  Ðwith€Latham€the€amount€of€any€such€increases€in€cost€until€the€construction€was€complete.€Ð è 8  ÐFurthermore,€RBI€submitted€into€evidence€only€a€portion€of€the€invoices€in€support€of€its€claim€thatÐ Ô$  ÐLatham€owes€more€than€$650,000.€€Therefore,€we€find€that€the€evidence€does€not€preponderateÐ À  Ðagainst€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€the€parties€had€a€meeting€of€the€minds€regarding€the€maximumÐ ¬ü  Ðcontract€price€of€$650,000,€and€that€the€items€listed€in€Exhibit€B€were€included€in€that€price.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àWe€must€discuss€separately€RBIððs€claim€related€to€equipment€and€furniture,€because€it€isÐ pÀ Ðundisputed€that€those€items€were€not€covered€in€Exhibit€B€to€the€Amendment€or€in€any€of€theÐ \¬ Ðapplications€for€payment€except€for€the€final€application.€€Indeed,€most€of€the€evidence€on€theseÐ H˜ Ðitems€is€essentially€unrefuted€in€the€record.€€Emburyððs€testimony,€Lathamððs€testimony,€and€the€trialÐ 4„ Ðexhibits€all€indicate€that€Latham€intended€to€pay€for€equipment€and€furniture€expenses€out€of€theÐ  p Ð$250,000€ð ðDesign,€Furniture€and€Equipmentðð€portion€of€her€Bank€loan,€not€out€of€the€$650,000Ð  \ Ðborrowed€for€the€cost€of€construction.€€Campbell€was€paid€over€$100,000€for€the€equipment€providedÐ øH Ðby€his€company,€and€he€was€paid€out€of€the€$250,000€portion€of€the€loan.€€RBIððs€final€applicationÐ ä4 Ðfor€payment,€which€included€amounts€for€ð ðEquipmentðð€and€ð ðFurniture,ðð€resulted€from€RBI€buildingÐ Ð  Ðthe€bars,€completing€the€millwork,€and€installing€the€kitchen€equipment.€€In€the€final€application€forÐ ¼  Ðpayment,€RBI€invoiced€Latham€for€these€items,€listing€$6,527€for€ð ðEquipmentðð€and€$22,239€forÐ ¨ø Ðð ðFurniture,ðð€for€a€total€of€$28,766.€€At€trial,€Latham€conceded€that€payments€for€equipment€andÐ ”ä Ðfurniture€were€to€be€made€out€of€the€$250,000€portion€of€her€Bank€loan,€and€she€did€not€dispute€thatÐ €Ð ÐRBI€had€performed€the€work€related€to€these€charges.€€It€is€apparent€from€the€undisputed€evidenceÐ l¼ Ðthat€the€$28,766€amount€requested€by€RBI€for€these€items€should€have€been€paid€separately€andÐ X ¨ Ðshould€not€have€been€taken€from€the€$650,000€maximum€contract€price€for€construction€costs.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РD!” ÐTherefore,€we€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€finding€on€this€component€of€RBIððs€claimed€damages€andÐ 0"€  Ðremand€to€the€trial€court€to€enter€a€judgment€in€favor€of€RBI€for€$28,766€owed€by€Latham€withÐ #l! Ðrespect€to€these€items.Ð $X" ÐÌà  àRBI€claims€that€there€was€no€contract€between€RBI€and€Latham,€and€that€RBI€therefore€isÐ à%0!$ Ðentitled€to€the€reasonable€value€of€its€services€under€a€theory€of€òòquantum€meruitóó.€€However,€we€haveÐ Ì&"% Ðâ âdetermined€that€the€parties€had€an€existing€contract€regarding€the€subject€matter€for€which€RBI€seeksÐ ¸'#& Ðto€recover.€€Therefore,€the€doctrine€of€òòquantum€meruit€óóis€inapplicable,€and€this€argument€must€beÐ ° Ðrejected.€€Ô#†¼A»XXE ²#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔòòò òSee€Swafford€v.€Harrisó óóó,€967€S.W.2d€319,€324€(Tenn.€1998).€Ð œì Ðâ âÌÔ#†¼A»XXE âÑ#ÔÔ‡XE X»¼AÔà  àFinally,€RBI€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€excluding€from€the€evidence€the€March€4,Ð tÄ Ð1999€letter€indicating€that€the€parties€had€an€agreement€for€Latham€to€pay€$80,113€in€addition€to€theÐ `° Ð$650,000,€because€it€related€to€an€attempt€to€compromise€or€settle€a€disputed€claim.€€The€trial€judgeÐ L œ Ðcommented,€ð ðI€just€heard€your€client€testify€that€he€came€up€with€a€compromised€figure€just€to€getÐ 8 ˆ Ðit€out€of€the€way.€€He€assumed€financial€hardships€and€he€felt€lucky€in€getting€a€lesser€amount€andÐ $ t Ðjust€get€out.€.€.€.€€This€is€all€settlement€compromise€attempts€on€both€parts.ððÐ  ` ÐÌà  àTennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€408€provides:Ð è 8  ÐÌà8  àEvidence€of€(1)€furnishing€or€offering€to€furnish€or€(2)€accepting€or€offering€to€acceptÐ À  Ða€valuable€consideration€in€compromising€or€attempting€to€compromise€a€claim,Ð ¬ü  Ðwhether€in€present€litigation€or€related€litigation,€which€claim€was€disputed€or€wasÐ ˜è  Ðreasonably€expected€to€be€disputed€as€to€either€validity€or€amount,€is€not€admissibleÐ „Ô  Ðto€prove€liability€for€or€invalidity€of€a€civil€claim€or€its€amount.ÐpÀÐ Ð  Ðà  à€€€Ð \¬ ÐÓÛ£ÓTenn.€R.€Evid.€408.€€€€Ð H˜ ÐÓñ×Óà  àWe€must€conclude€that€the€letter€was€properly€excluded€as€evidence€of€an€attempt€to€settleÐ  p Ðor€compromise€RBIððs€claim€to€additional€funds.€€Embury€testified€that€the€letter€memorialized€theÐ  \ Ðpartiesðð€agreement€that€Latham€owed€additional€funds,€and€that€it€merely€set€out€the€terms€ofÐ øH ÐLathamððs€payment€schedule.€€Embury€also€testified,€however,€that€he€reduced€the€full€amountÐ ä4 Ðclaimed€because€the€restaurant€was€not€doing€well€and€he€thought€that€his€ð ðbest€chance€in€getting€theÐ Ð  Ðmoney€out€was€to€agree€to€her€paying€us€our€original€fee.ðð€€This€indicates€Emburyððs€intent€toÐ ¼  Ðcompromise€a€claim€that€he€thought€was€ð ðreasonably€expected€to€be€disputed.ðð€€In€light€of€this,€weÐ ¨ø Ðaffirm€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€exclude€the€letter€as€evidence€of€compromise€or€settlement€underÐ ”ä ÐTennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€408.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€in€part,€reversed€in€part,€and€remanded€for€the€trialÐ X ¨ Ðcourt€to€enter€a€judgment€in€favor€of€RBI€for€$28,766.00.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€to€be€taxed€equallyÐ D!” Ðto€Appellant€Retail€Builders,€Inc.,€and€its€surety,€and€Appellee€Margaret€Latham,€for€which€executionÐ 0"€  Ðmay€issue,€if€necessary.Ð #l! ÐÌ€ÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð Ì&"% Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àHOLLY€M.€KIRBY,€JUDGEÔ#†¼A»XXE ŠÒ#Ô