Vanessa Ibe

Following a successful appeal that reduced the plaintiff's damages award in a construction lien trial, the court considered written submissions on the costs awarded by the Master.

The Master had originally awarded the plaintiff $485,000 in costs based on an erroneous application of Rule 49.

The court found that the plaintiff's second offer to settle implicitly withdrew its first offer, and since the reduced damages award was less than the second offer, Rule 49 did not apply.

The court reduced the Master's costs award to $236,500 on a partial indemnity scale to reflect proportionality and the reduced damages award.

The defendants brought a motion to oppose the confirmation of a Master's report following a 29-day trial on a construction lien reference.

The Master had awarded the plaintiff $243,325.20 plus costs and elevated pre-judgment interest, largely based on adverse credibility findings against the defendants.

The Superior Court found that the Master made a palpable and overriding error by misreading the date on a key invoice, which tainted his credibility assessment and led to an erroneous $72,000 award for 'extra' design work.

The court deducted the $72,000 from the judgment and reduced the pre-judgment interest to the statutory rate, but upheld the Master's findings on commissions for builder upgrades, price reductions, and post-termination items.

The defendants were awarded $19,000 in costs for the motion.