Marton Remodeling v. Jensen
Supreme
Court of
706
P.2d 607.
Facts: Marton did some remodeling
for Jensen, then delivered a bill for around $6,500. Jensen thought this was excessive and offered
to pay $5,000. Marton refused, but
Jensen sent them a check for $5,000 with a condition saying that endorsement of
the check would constitute satisfaction of all claims against Jensen. Marton refused again. Marton filed a mechanic’s lien on Jensen’s
property, then cashed the check, writing “not full payment” under the
condition. Marton sued for the remaining
$1,500 or so. Marton won at trial, but
Jensen appealed, saying that by signing the check, Marton effectively agreed to
drop any possible claim.
Issue: Did Marton’s cashing of the
$5,000 check constitute an accord and satisfaction notwithstanding the words
added by Jensen?
Rule: Accord and satisfaction is
of a single unliquidated claim is not avoided just because the debtor only paid
what he thought he owed.
Analysis: The court chooses to follow
the common interpretation of UCC § 1-207 in that it doesn’t change the common
law rule of accord and satisfaction. The
court says it is advocating the policy of allowing settlements in order to
avoid litigation. The court finds that
there was indeed accord and satisfaction in this case.
Conclusion: The judgment for the plaintiff
is reversed.