The plaintiff appealed a master's report following a lengthy construction lien trial arising from a residential development joint venture.
The appellant argued that the master committed factual and legal errors in rejecting several claims for extras, carpentry services, site supervision services, and in finding that the plaintiff’s construction lien rights had expired.
The court held that the applicable standard of review required substantial deference to a master conducting a trial on a reference, particularly regarding findings of fact and credibility.
After reviewing transcripts and documentary evidence, the court concluded that the alleged errors largely involved disagreements over credibility assessments and weight of evidence.
Finding no palpable and overriding error or error of law, the court confirmed the master’s decision and dismissed the appeal.
