## Facts

- A contractor agreed to renovate an owner’s building for conversion into a restaurant.
- The project involved delays, change orders, and disputes over workmanship quality.
- The contractor ultimately removed its workers from the project.
- The contractor filed a mechanic’s lien and sued to foreclose, seeking payment for labor and materials.
- The owner counterclaimed for breach of contract, seeking (i) costs to redo/complete defective work and (ii) lost restaurant profits attributable to delayed opening.
- A jury awarded the contractor $18,000 on its claim and awarded the owner $22,895 for redoing/completing the work plus $14,000 for lost profits due to delay.
- The trial court denied the contractor’s motion for a new trial and awarded the owner attorney’s fees and costs under the mechanics’ lien statute.

## Issues

1. Whether delay damages are recoverable when a construction contract contains no completion date and no express “time is of the essence” clause.
2. Whether an owner operating a new business is categorically barred from recovering lost profits for delay.
3. Whether the owner’s lost-profits proof satisfied the requirement of reasonable certainty.

## Decision

- The court affirmed denial of a new trial.
- The court held that delay damages may be recoverable even without a “time is of the essence” clause or a stated completion date; performance is required within a reasonable time.
- The court rejected a categorical “new business rule” barring lost profits for new businesses; recoverability turns on proof with reasonable certainty.
- The court reversed the $14,000 lost-profits award as insufficiently supported and speculative.
- The court left intact the remaining judgment, including the owner’s damages for redoing/completing work, the contractor’s recovery on its claim, and the lien-related attorney’s fees and costs.

## Legal Principles

- If a contract sets no time for performance, the law implies performance within a reasonable time; lack of an express “time is of the essence” term does not preclude delay damages.
- Contract damages aim to place the non-breaching party in the position it would have occupied had the contract been performed.
- Lost profits are recoverable only when proved with reasonable certainty; speculative or conjectural profits are not recoverable.
- New businesses are not barred per se from recovering lost profits; the same reasonable-certainty standard applies, though proof may be harder.
- Lost profits must be shown as net profits; gross receipts, without accounting for expenses, do not establish lost net profits.

## Conclusion

The court held that a contractor can face delay damages under a reasonable-time standard even without a “time is of the essence” clause, abandoned a per se prohibition on new-business lost profits, and reversed a lost-profits award where the proof relied on gross receipts and unsupported estimates rather than reasonably certain evidence of net profits.


Drews Co. v. Ledwith-Wolfe Assocs., Inc., 296 S.C. 207, 371 S.E.2d 532 (S.C. 1988)