Amber Well Drilling filed suit against Tim and Jennifer Reed when the Reeds didn’t pay for a well drilled on their residential property. At first blush, it seemed like a simple case – until counsel for Amber discovered a problem.
Amber Well Drilling does work on residential, commercial and industrial sites. The Reed job was residential. New York General Business Law Sections 771 requires specific notices and disclosures in contracts for residential jobs: All home improvement, home repair and new residential construction. landscaping, yard improvements, fencing and pools are covered under the law. Well drilling too.
Residential contract are different
(1) Must be in writing, (2) signed by all parties, (3) include the contractor’s address, phone and license numbers, (4) show approximate start and completion dates, (5) identify whether time is the essence of the agreement, (6) describe the work, (7) list materials provided, (8) include notices about New York’s lien law and pay deposits, (9) show a progress payment schedule, if any, (10) include notice of the 3-day right to cancel, and (11) identify the contractor’s insurance carriers.
Amber’s contract for the Reed job didn’t include all those notices. Under New York law, that barred Amber from collecting the amount due under the written agreement. But the job wasn’t a total loss. New York law allows contractors to collect some amount for work done. That’s called quantum meruit, the amount earned. With no valid contract, proving the amount earned isn’t an easy problem. Rather than claiming a single amount, the contract price, counsel for Amber had to prove the value of every service and material the Reeds received.
The trial court judge instructed the jury that Amber’s contract was defective. It didn’t conform to New York General Business Law § 771. The judge also told the jury they could award Amber some amount as quantum meruit. The jury deliberated and gave Amber an award for their effort.
But that wasn’t the end
Attorney for Amber moved for judgment in the amount awarded by the jury. That was routine. But the attorney asked for interest and attorneys' fees -- as provided in the contract. True, Amber couldn’t collect the contract price. But counsel for Amber cited contract language that entitled Amber to attorney fees and interest if suit was needed to collect. That part of the contract had nothing to do with home improvement. Counsel argued it was a severable part of an otherwise void contract. The trial court didn’t agree. Amber appealed.
On April 24, 2026, the appellate court affirmed the trial court decision. “[T]o allow a contractor to draft a noncompliant contract and yet still recover attorneys' fees and interest at the contractor's chosen rate as provided in the contract would only ‘incentivize contractors to disregard the statute, thereby thwarting the intent of the statute’ which is ‘designed to protect the homeowner.’”
I agree. Awarding attorney fees to a contractor suing on a void agreement makes no sense.
Avoid the embarrassment and expense of trying to collect on a defective contract. Construction Contract Writer drafts perfectly valid agreements for any type of construction in any state. The trial version is free.
