P entered into an agreement with D for the construction and installation of new, custom-designed jewelry cabinets, cases, and fixtures for P's retail jewelry store. The items were to be built in accordance with plans and specifications drawn by a California-based designer specializing in jewelry stores who had been retained to design the renovation of P's store. After paying over $32,000 on the contract, P wrote to D in May 1986 complaining of the workmanship and of the fact that solid cherry hardwood cases were 'ordered and paid for,' but 'we received [only] veneered particle board.' D's president responded by denying that there were any defects and suggested that the unpaid balance was sufficient to cover any unsatisfactory items. P sued for breach of contract, breach of warranty and fraud. D counterclaimed for $3,000, representing the alleged unpaid balance on the contract. The jury found in P's favor, awarding $40,000 in damages and rejecting D's counterclaim. D appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.