Miami Jury Awards $230K in Steel Venture Contract Dispute
Table of Contents
Case Background
Abraham Palacios, a skilled professional in steel structure fabrication, formed an oral business partnership with Alejandro Quintana in October 2020. They planned to jointly launch and operate companies focused on metal fabrication. Palacios contributed industry knowledge, experience, and sweat equity. Quintana offered to provide financial backing. Together, they registered two companies, Steel Building Assemble, LLC and Q&P Steel Corporation, and agreed to split profits and losses equally.
Cause
Quintana lacked immediate capital but owned two warehouses with sufficient equity. Palacios secured their sale, enabling the partnership’s seed funding. Using that capital, Palacios located and negotiated the purchase of industrial lots in Lake Hamilton and St. Cloud. These properties, though meant for the partnership, were titled under Quintana’s affiliate, Holdings of Christopher, LLC. Palacios also contributed $350,000 worth of equipment and sourced more through discounts and personal contacts. Despite his efforts, in June 2021, Palacios received a letter ending their business relationship. Shortly before, Quintana removed himself from Holdings of Christopher, LLC, suggesting an effort to shield assets from Palacios. Palacios was then barred from accessing his equipment stored on partnership property.
Injury
Palacios lost access to equipment valued at $350,000. He had worked for months establishing operations and securing assets. Despite demands, he was denied entry to the warehouse where his equipment remained. Quintana refused to acknowledge the partnership or return the machinery. Palacios’s work, resources, and reputation were left uncompensated. His efforts to build the joint venture had been used to benefit Quintana’s family business instead.
Damages
Palacios claimed financial losses tied to his equipment and services. He sought compensation for unpaid labor, lost partnership interest, and misappropriated property. He requested pre- and post-judgment interest, attorney’s fees, and court costs. He also alleged fraudulent inducement, unjust enrichment, and conversion, arguing that Quintana had intentionally exploited his contributions under false pretenses. Palacios demanded a jury trial and full damages for breach of agreement and misappropriated assets.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiffs: Abraham Palacios | Yesenia Bottrus
Counsel for Plaintiff: Alan R. Soven | Aileen M. Carpenter | Alexander Angueira
Defendants: Alejandro Quintana | Holdings of Christoper, LLC | Q&P Steel Corp. | Steel Building Assemble, LLC | Quintana Records| Jose Alejandro Quintana Diaz
Counsel for Defendant: Jay M. Levy
Claims
First Cause of Action – Breach of Oral Contract
Palacios and Quintana formed an oral agreement to jointly create and operate two steel businesses, agreeing to share profits and losses equally. In reliance on this agreement, Palacios contributed substantial labor, industry knowledge, and equipment worth approximately $350,000. Despite these contributions, Quintana later excluded him from the business and failed to honor their agreement.
Second Cause of Action – Fraudulent Inducement
Quintana made false promises concerning co-ownership and profit-sharing to persuade Palacios to invest time, money, and resources into the business. These promises lacked genuine intent and served as a scheme to exploit Palacios’s contributions. Quintana diverted business interests and profits to himself and his relatives, including through Holdings of Christopher, LLC.
Third Cause of Action – Unjust Enrichment
Quintana received the benefit of Palacios’s labor, equipment, and connections without offering compensation or recognizing any ownership interest. The business used Palacios’s property and efforts to acquire assets and generate profits, while denying him a share in the resulting value. This enriched Quintana and his affiliates at Palacios’s expense.
Fourth Cause of Action – Conversion
Quintana and Holdings of Christopher, LLC retained control over Palacios’s equipment, valued at approximately $350,000, and used it for their own operations. Despite repeated demands, they refused to return the property, thereby unlawfully converting it for their own benefit.
Defense
The Defendants raised several affirmative defenses, including that the claims for Breach of Oral Contract and Fraudulent Inducement were barred by the Statute of Frauds, as the agreement could not be performed within one year. They argued that the alleged partnership never formed because the Plaintiff failed to contribute $1,500,000, lacked a meeting of the minds, and acted as a volunteer. Other defenses included estoppel, failure to mitigate damages, unclean hands barring the unjust enrichment claim, and that unjust enrichment was improper when an express contract existed. The Defendants further claimed the Plaintiff abandoned the property involved in the conversion claim and asserted a lien and set-off right for over $115,000 in loans made on the Plaintiff’s behalf.
Jury Verdict
On February 3, 2025, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, Abraham Palacios, in part. After considering all evidence and arguments, the jury found that Defendant Alejandro Quintana breached an oral agreement with Palacios and awarded $100,000 in damages. The jury also found that Alejandro Quintana and Holdings of Christopher, LLC were liable for conversion and awarded an additional $200,000. However, the jury determined that Quintana loaned Palacios $70,000 that was not repaid. As a result, Palacios recovered a net total of $230,000 in damages.