Skip to main content

Murphy Elevator Co., Inc. v. 11320 Chester L.L.C.

Ohio Ct. App.April 11, 2018No. NO. C–170251Cited 2 times
Mixed Result11320 Chester LLC$13,626.14 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Myers
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

The appellate court affirmed the trial court's breach of contract judgment in favor of Murphy Elevator for $13,626.14, but reversed and remanded the portion regarding damages calculation for the remaining months of the second contract year due to incorrect measure of damages applied.

Excerpt

CONTRACTS - DAMAGES: Where the parties' elevator-maintenance contract clearly and unambiguously provided that defendant would be responsible for paying the difference between plaintiff's regular and overtime billing rates if it requested that plaintiff perform services outside of the contractually specified dates and times, the trial court did not err in accepting testimony from plaintiff as to the amount plaintiff charged for regular and overtime services in a given year, or in awarding damages accordingly. Where the contract did not specify the hourly rate that defendant would be required to pay plaintiff for performing requested services that were not covered under the contract, the trial court did not err in awarding plaintiff damages for the services in the amount of plaintiff's standard rates. The trial court erred in awarding plaintiff the gross revenue that it would have received under the second year of the parties' contract where plaintiff stopped performing contractual services due to defendant's nonpayment the court should have awarded plaintiff its lost profits.

What This Ruling Means

# Murphy Elevator Co., Inc. v. 11320 Chester L.L.C. ## What Happened Murphy Elevator and 11320 Chester LLC had a maintenance contract that specified when elevator services would be performed. When the building owner requested work outside those agreed-upon times, the contract stated it should pay the difference between regular and overtime rates. The building owner didn't pay these extra charges, leading Murphy Elevator to sue for breach of contract. ## What the Court Decided The appeals court sided with Murphy Elevator, awarding $13,626.14 in damages. The court confirmed that the contract clearly required the building owner to pay overtime rates when services were performed outside scheduled times. However, the court sent part of the case back to the trial court because it disagreed with how damages were calculated for the second contract year. ## Why This Matters for Workers This case reinforces that written contracts protect service providers when customers change work arrangements. It shows courts will enforce clear contract terms about payment for overtime or non-standard work hours, and that companies can recover money owed for services provided under different conditions than originally agreed.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.