Skip to main content

Estevez v. Cloud9 Esports, Inc.

S.D.N.Y.January 3, 2022No. 1:21-cv-08883
Defendant WinPeter R. Brown Construction, Inc.$435,457 at issue
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
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 district court's judgment that PRBC properly terminated Ragghianti's subcontract for default and that Ragghianti failed to prove damages beyond unpaid labor and materials already awarded at trial. PRBC recovered $435,457 after offset and was awarded attorney's fees.

What This Ruling Means

**Construction Worker Loses Contract Dispute** A construction worker named Ragghianti had a contract dispute with Peter R. Brown Construction, Inc. (PRBC). Ragghianti was working as a subcontractor when PRBC terminated his contract, claiming he failed to meet his obligations. Ragghianti sued the company, arguing they wrongfully ended his contract and owed him money for his work and damages. The court sided with the construction company. Both the original trial court and the appeals court found that PRBC had valid reasons to terminate Ragghianti's subcontract and that he had indeed failed to fulfill his contractual duties. The court awarded Ragghianti some money for unpaid labor and materials he had already provided, but rejected his claims for additional damages. PRBC ended up recovering $435,457 from Ragghianti after all calculations were complete, and the company was also awarded attorney's fees. This case shows that when workers or subcontractors fail to meet their contractual obligations, employers can legally terminate those contracts. However, workers are still entitled to payment for work already completed, even when contracts are terminated for poor performance.

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.