December 10, 2015
briefs: David C. Pierson, Esq., Eaton Peabody, Portland, for
appellants Leslie and Michael Reis.
Robert Ruesch, Esq., and Taylor R. Neff, Esq., Verrill Dana,
LLP, Portland, for appellee Warren Construction Group, LLC.
argument: David C. Pierson, Esq., for appellants Leslie and
R. Neff, Esq., for appellee Warren Construction Group, LLC.
SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, and HJELM,
[¶1] Leslie and Michael Reis appeal from a
summary judgment entered in the Superior Court (Cumberland
County, Cole, J. ) in favor of Warren Construction
Group, LLC, on Warren's claims for breach of contract,
violation of the Prompt Payment Act, 10 M.R.S. § §
1111-1120 (2015), and enforcement of a mechanic's lien.
We conclude that the Reises did not preserve the argument
they raise on appeal, and we affirm the judgment.
[¶2] The summary judgment record reveals the
following undisputed facts, which we view in the light most
favorable to the Reises, the nonprevailing parties.
See Budge v. Town of Millinocket, 2012 ME
122, ¶ 12, 55 A.3d 484. The parties entered into an oral
contract pursuant to which the Reises would pay Warren to
renovate their house in Freeport. Warren began the project in
late September of 2012, but stopped working in early February
of 2013 when the Reises had yet to make any payments.
[¶3] In May of 2013, Warren perfected a
mechanic's lien on the Reises' property and filed a
five-count complaint in the Superior Court. Warren alleged
breach of contract (Count I), quantum meruit (Count II),
unjust enrichment (Count III), violation of the Prompt
Payment Act, 10 M.R.S. § § 1111-1120 (Count IV),
and enforcement of its mechanic's lien (Count V). In the
answer he filed, Michael Reis admitted the following
assertion: " Warren and the Reises entered into a
binding contract for construction of the Project." Five
months later, Warren moved for summary judgments on its
breach of contract, ...