Eco Built, Inc. and Ed Travis v. Mark Lulfs D/B/A Paperhanger Plus Landmark Organization, L.P. And California Wholesale Material Supply, Inc. D/B/A Calply
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) | 2010
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
Eco Built sued Landmark Organization for unpaid work on the Hilton Austin construction project. Both parties had breached the subcontract, but the court ruled that Landmark couldn't use Eco Built's breach as an excuse to avoid paying for work completed before the dispute. The key lesson: even if your contractor breaches the contract, you can still demand payment for work you've already done, and they can't simply refuse to pay.
Key Takeaways
- •Document all work completed and invoice promptly—payment obligations exist for work done before any breach occurs, regardless of later disputes
- •Don't assume a contractor's breach lets them off the hook for paying you; both parties can have valid damage claims even when both have breached
- •Keep detailed records of what you've completed and when, because courts will look at what was finished before the relationship fell apart
Landmark was not discharged by virtue of Eco Built's material breach from any payment obligations to Eco Built that accrued under the subcontract prior to termination.
Frequently Asked Question
If my contractor breaches the contract, can they refuse to pay me for work I've already completed?
No. A contractor's breach doesn't erase their obligation to pay for work you completed before the breach occurred. You can still demand payment for that work and pursue damages. However, the contractor can also sue you for their losses from your breach, so both parties may end up with valid claims.
Related Cases
General Services Commission v. Little-Tex Insulation Co.
The State does not waive sovereign immunity from breach-of-contract suits by accepting contract benefits; Chapter 2260's administrative procedure is the exclusive remedy for such claims.
Green International, Inc. v. Solis
No-damages-for-delay clauses in construction contracts need not meet the conspicuousness requirement established in Dresser for exculpatory negligence clauses, and such clauses are enforceable to bar delay damages absent specific exceptions.
Heldenfels Bros. v. City of Corpus Christi
A municipality owes no duty to a subcontractor to ensure a general contractor provides valid payment bonds, and a subcontractor cannot recover from the municipality under quantum meruit, unjust enrichment, or negligence theories when the general contractor abandons the project.
Rocor International, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh
An insured may assert an article 21.21 claim against its excess liability carrier for unfair claim settlement practices, but liability requires proof of a proper settlement demand within policy limits that an ordinarily prudent insurer would accept.
Weize Co. v. Colorado Regional Construction, Inc.
A general contractor violated Colorado's construction trust fund statute by failing to hold funds in trust for subcontractors and suppliers, and a lien release bond does not exempt contractors from trust fund obligations or excuse failure to record a lis pendens.
EBC, Inc. v. Clark Building System, Inc.
A supplier cannot enforce a payment obligation against a project owner based on a letter offering optional direct payment arrangements, where the supplier's own deposition testimony demonstrates it never understood the letter as a binding contract.