Scribd
Upload
22 views2 pages

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Pete E. O'Dell & Sons appealed a district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Centex Construction Co. in a breach of contract case seeking additional payment for work performed. In 3 sentences: The appeals court affirmed the district court's finding that the 55 release agreements signed by O'Dell releasing Centex from further claims were supported by adequate consideration. The court also found no genuine issue of material fact regarding O'Dell's argument that a damage notification clause in the contract was unenforceable due to economic duress, and therefore affirmed the district court's judgment based on the lower court's reasoning.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
22 views2 pages

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Pete E. O'Dell & Sons appealed a district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Centex Construction Co. in a breach of contract case seeking additional payment for work performed. In 3 sentences: The appeals court affirmed the district court's finding that the 55 release agreements signed by O'Dell releasing Centex from further claims were supported by adequate consideration. The court also found no genuine issue of material fact regarding O'Dell's argument that a damage notification clause in the contract was unenforceable due to economic duress, and therefore affirmed the district court's judgment based on the lower court's reasoning.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

798 F.

2d 1409
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
Circuit.
PETE E. O'DELL & SONS, Appellant,
United States of America, for use and benefit of Pete E.
O'dell & Sons, Plaintiff,
v.
CENTEX CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.; The American
Insurance
Company; The Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., Appellees.
No. 85-2280.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


Argued May 5, 1986.
Decided Aug. 8, 1986.

Jim H. Guynn, Jr. (S.D. Roberts Moore; Gentry, Locke, Rakes & Moore
on brief), for appellants.
Joseph D. West (Mollie A. Murphy; Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue on
brief), for appellees.
W.D.Va.
AFFIRMED.
Before SPROUSE and ERVIN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:

Pete E. O'dell & Sons ("O'dell") appeals from an order of the district court

granting summary judgment for Centex Construction Co., Inc. ("Centex").


O'dell brought this action based on breach of contract and other legal theories,
seeking additional monies for work allegedly performed in addition to the
contract. On appeal, O'dell contends that the district court erred in finding
consideration for the fifty-five release agreements signed by O'dell.
Additionally, O'dell contends that the district court erred in finding no genuine
issue of material fact as to its assertion that the damage notification clause in
the contract was not a bar to this action because Centex placed O'dell in
"economic duress" and forced it to sign the fifty-five releases.

Upon consideration of the record, briefs, and oral argument, we find O'dell's
contentions to be without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment below on
the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Centex Construction Co.,
Inc., No. 83-0625 (W.D.Va. Nov. 21, 1985).

AFFIRMED.

You might also like