The contractor appealed a decision of a master following a two‑day trial concerning a residential renovation contract and a construction lien dispute.
The master had denied the contractor any fee or profit and ordered the homeowners to reimburse only half of the contractor’s expenditures after finding a breach of a purported “timely reporting” obligation.
The contractor argued the master misinterpreted the contract by imposing obligations not contained in its plain language.
The court held that the master appeared to disregard the contract’s terms and erred in denying fees and profit on that basis.
The appeal was allowed and the contractor, as the successful party on appeal, was entitled to costs on a partial indemnity basis.
