Skiba v. Gessner

Respondent was hired by appellant’s 1 then fiancée, Terral Matlock, to perform lot clearing and the removal of unmarked trees, roots, and ground debris in return for $13,200. Appellant did not pay respondent for the work, but instead sent respondent a complaint letter, which stated the scope of respondent’s work included root-raking and cleaning of the lot to prepare it for landscaping. 2 Respondent perfected a mechanic’s lien and later brought an action for foreclosure. Appellant answered and filed a counterclaim that respondent left the job unfinished and that she had to hire someone else…