In Vermillion v. The Roofing Guys Inc., James Vermillion (“Plaintiff”) appealed an order of the Supreme Court in Onondaga County granting The Roofing Guys, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) motion to preclude testimony or evidence of consequential damages. Vermillion v. Roofing Guys, Inc., 239 A.D.3d 1336, 1336, 232 N.Y.S.3d 867 (2025). After purchasing a residence in Syracuse, Plaintiff contracted with Defendant to re-roof the residence and Defendant subcontracted its work to another contractor. Id. However, at the time the contract with the builder was executed, consequential damages were not contemplated. Id. During the re-roof, a severe storm occurred which caused water damage to the property, including the attic. Id. Plaintiff brought suit against the Defendant and during discovery sought to include an expert disclosure regarding additional damages, including but not limited to, an increase in the mortgage, project delays, and material and construction costs. Id.  The Supreme Court granted Defendant’s motion to prelude Plaintiff from providing testimony or proof at trial regarding consequential damages. Id. at 868. 

Generally, in New York, in any action for which breach of contract is alleged, a party’s recovery is ordinarily “…restricted to those damages which were reasonably foreseen or contemplated by the parties during their negotiations or at the time the contract was executed…” and is “…ordinarily limited to general damages which are the natural and probable consequence of the breach.” Id. Any other damages which fall outside of this premise would need to be “within the contemplation of the parties …prior to contracting.” Id.

After its review of the nature, purpose, and the circumstances for which the contract was entered, the Court held that the contract was merely a “bare bones” contract to tear off the roof, replace the rotted plywood, relay the shingles, and clean the debris and that there was never any mention of consequential damages. Id. Because consequential damages were not contemplated by the parties at the time the contract was executed, the Supreme Court’s decision was upheld. Id.

It is always important to consider the relevant damage provisions included in your contract. New York Courts have made clear that Plaintiff’s will need to explicitly provide language or evidence demonstrating that the Parties contemplated the inclusion of consequential damages in order for Plaintiff to furnish evidence or testimony regarding consequential damages at trial.