In a construction case, we represented the owner in arbitration against a contractor who had overbilled the project and then blamed our clients for the overruns. Here is part of the cross-examination:
Q: And you didn’t mind swearing that that was the case, even though you knew it wasn’t?
A: Absolutely. I’m wrong. But again, I thought I was going to get paid. I know, sometimes you do things you don’t want to do, but you need to get paid. I was being promised I was going to get paid. I felt comfortable. I believed him—I believed the group.
Q: Your oath means nothing to you if you would need to get paid. Is that what your testimony is?
A: What do you mean, my oath means nothing to me?
Q: Your oath in these draw statements means nothing to you in the face of needing to get paid. Is that what your testimony is?
A: My intention was to finish the project—
Q: No, just answer my question: Your oath meant nothing to you—
A: It still meant I was—
Q: —if you need to get paid?
A: Wrong, because my intention was to pay—if I had gotten delivery of the elevator and I owed the elevator, the money would have come out. So no, it didn’t mean it. If I had taken $30.00 today and owed it tomorrow, I would still owe the $30.00.
Q: These draw statements are false, you are saying, and your only defense is that Mr. R. told you to falsify them.
A: They are not false. I took money against the elevator, and I used that money to pay their debt with the intention to get replenished from your clients later on in the project.
Q: So when you wrote to the bank that the line item was for elevator stuff—
A: I lied.
To learn about similar services we offer visit our practice areas page. Patterson Law Firm takes a variety of cases. If you have a case similar to the one above or in one of our other practice areas, contact us at (312) 223-1699 or click here.
