Skip to main content
Iowa Judicial Branch
Main Content

Case No. 22-1721

For summaries from opinions prior to August, 2018, view PDF versions here

Bradshaw Renovations, LLC
v.
Barry Graham and Jacklynn Graham

Plaintiff contractor appeals an adverse jury verdict on defendant homeowners’ consumer fraud claim under Iowa Code section 714H.5 (2020) and the district court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s claims for unjust enrichment and quantum meruit. Defendants cross-appeal their attorney fee award on the consumer fraud claim. The court of appeals affirmed. Plaintiff seeks further review.

County:
Polk
Trial Court Case No.:
LACL148948

Applicant

Bradshaw Renovations, LLC

Resister

Barry Graham and Jacklynn Graham

Attorney for the Applicant

Matthew J. Hemphill

Attorneys for the Resister

Zachary J. Hermsen
Anna E. Mallen

Supreme Court

Oral Argument Schedule

15-15-5

Mar 27, 2025 1:30 PM

Briefs

Supreme Court Opinion

Opinion Number:
22-1721
Date Published:
May 02, 2025
Date Amended:
Jul 16, 2025

Court of Appeals

Court of Appeals Opinion

Opinion Number:
22-1721
Date Published:
Oct 02, 2024
Summary

            Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Sarah Crane, Judge.  AFFIRMED ON APPEAL AND CROSS-APPEAL AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.  Heard by Schumacher, P.J., Langholz, J., and Doyle, S.J.  Opinion by Langholz, J.  (24 pages)

            Bradshaw Renovations, LLC, a construction contractor hired by Barry and Jacklynn Graham to renovate their home, appeals an adverse jury verdict on the Grahams’ consumer-fraud claims and the district court’s judgment on its unjust-enrichment and quantum-meruit claims.  The Grahams cross-appeal the amount of their attorney-fee award.  OPINION HOLDS: Given the considerable deference owed to the jury, we hold that substantial evidence supports the consumer-fraud verdict.  We also agree that the district court correctly dismissed Bradshaw Renovations’ unjust-enrichment and quantum-meruit claims because they sought damages for matters covered by the parties’ written contract.  And we affirm on the Grahams’ cross-appeal because they failed to raise their claimed error in the district court and thus failed to preserve it for our review.  We agree that the Grahams are entitled to appellate attorney fees for the defense of the consumer-fraud verdict and remand to the district court to determine the reasonable amount.

Other Information

Date Further Review is Granted:
Dec 04, 2024
© 2026 Iowa Judicial Branch. All Rights Reserved.