ARGOS USA, LLC F/K/A ARGOS READY MIX, LLC
v.
PATRICK FRANKLIN D/B/A CEPHAS CONCRETE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court reversed a trial court's judgment for the defendant in a debt collection case. The court found that the trial court's conclusion that the defendant owed nothing was against the manifest weight of the evidence, and that the defendant did owe a specific amount for goods and services.
Yes, the trial court's finding that Franklin owed Argos nothing was against the manifest weight of the evidence. The record established that Franklin owed Argos $103,851.83.
[1] A trial court's finding of no liability is reversed as against the weight of the evidence when the record clearly establishes the defendant's obligation to pay a specific…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A review of the evidentiary record shows no basis for the trial court’s conclusion that Franklin owed Argos nothing.”
This quote establishes the appellate court's primary reason for reversing the lower court's decision.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceArgos USA sued Patrick Franklin for payment for concrete goods and services. After a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment for Franklin, findi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Action For Payment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Argos USA (“Argos”) filed a complaint against Patrick Franklin d/b/a Cephas Concrete (“Franklin”) seeking payment for concrete goods and services purchased from Argos pursuant to a verbal open account agreement. After a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment in favor of Franklin, concluding that Franklin owed nothing to Argos, which now seeks to reverse that judgment in this appeal.
A review of the evidentiary record shows no basis for the trial court’s conclusion that Franklin owed Argos nothing. No matter
how the evidence is viewed, it cannot be concluded that Franklin was not liable to Argos in some amount.
To the contrary, Argos presented evidence that Franklin was liable for $259,389.40 worth of goods and services, and that Franklin made payments totaling only $153,929.16, leaving an apparent balance due of $105,460.24. Argos claims entitlement to $118,286.69, which is the balance due plus $12,826.45. The record reflects, however, that a check from Franklin for $12,826.45 bounced and was added back to the balance on the payment reconciliation; as a result, the $12,826.45 claimed is already included in the $105,460.24 total. In addition, Franklin provided bank statements that showed two payments of $295.52 and $1,312.89, which had not been accounted for on the payment reconciliation. Franklin also presented evidence of several check payments, but those payments had already been accounted for on the payment reconciliation. The net result is that the record evidence establishes that Franklin owes Argos $103,851.83, which is the amount on the payment reconciliation ($105,460.24) minus these two payments from Franklin ($295.52 and $1,312.89).
Because the trial court’s finding of no liability was against the weight of the evidence, we reverse with instructions to enter judgment in favor of Argos in the amount of $103,851.83 nunc pro tunc to the date of the final judgment and to resolve any other pending claims.
REVERSED.
B.L. THOMAS, MAKAR, and KELSEY, JJ., concur. _____________________________