This case is Genesis Equities, LLC, v. Melissa Anne Duffield and Volleyfrog Iowa LLC, No. 24-1105 (Iowa Ct. App. October 15, 2025).
Melissa Duffield and Volleyfrog Iowa, LLC set out in 2017 to develop an indoor and outdoor volleyball complex intended for tournaments, training, and private lessons. In early 2018, Duffield was introduced through friends to Jeffrey Witter, a long-time Marion-area developer, and his daughter, Hannah Kustes. Witter and Kustes were affiliated with Genesis Equities, LLC, Adobe Construction, Inc., and Luxair Aviation, LLC, as well as named individually in the case.
Around March 2018, Duffield presented Witter with a four-phase construction plan for the proposed facility near the Marion Airport, estimating total costs at roughly $350,000. Phase one included nineteen outdoor sand volleyball courts, a tiki bar, and concessions, with indoor facilities planned for later phases. On March 19, Kustes sent Duffield a letter of intent outlining the construction terms, the lease and option-to-purchase provisions, and other key terms. A critical provision of that letter required Witter to secure and provide city utilities to the site within one year of signing. Although city services were not available at the time, Witter’s obligation to make them available within the year became a central point of dispute later in litigation.
Before any documents were signed, Duffield’s attorney reviewed the proposed materials and strongly advised her to abandon the deal. Counsel expressed concern about both the project’s financial feasibility and Duffield’s limited funding. Despite this advice, Duffield executed the agreements on March 23, 2018, returning a signed lease packet with updated site plans and a $18,000 payment for the first year’s rent.
The lease contained several relevant provisions. Repeated failure to pay rent or other amounts after notice on more than two occasions in a twelve-month period would constitute default. Insolvency or an assignment for the benefit of creditors would also trigger default, as would failure to comply with any lease term without timely cure. The option to purchase was set at $914,760, with partial credit for rent paid over the lease term. Duffield was additionally required to make biweekly payments to Abode Construction for development expenses plus a 10% fee, based on regular invoices submitted by Abode.
The record reflected that Duffield paid one early invoice of $42,513.30 but by August 2018 owed more than $200,000 in unpaid construction costs. In June, Witter halted all work until payment resumed. The parties later met and agreed to complete phase one, giving Duffield additional time to locate financing. By January 2020, Witter issued a notice of nonpayment of rent, and the parties executed an addendum acknowledging that Duffield was in violation of the lease. The addendum required an immediate $25,000 payment and the remaining balance by October 10, 2020. The balance was never paid, and Witter initiated proceedings for breach of lease and attorney fees.
Duffield counterclaimed, arguing that Witter breached the agreement by failing to provide city utilities within one year as promised. The district court rejected that claim, and the Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed. The courts determined that Duffield had become financially insolvent well before the one-year period expired, excusing Witter’s duty to provide city services. The court explained, “It is a basic principle of contract law that once one party to a contract breaches the agreement, the other party is no longer obligated to continue performing his or her own contractual obligations.” Kelly v. Iowa Mut. Ins. Co., 620 N.W.2d 637, 641 (Iowa 2000).
The lease also required Duffield to provide written notice of any alleged breach, which she failed to do. In addition, the court found that Duffield materially breached the construction contract by failing to pay Abode Construction as required, entitling Witter’s construction arm to recover all accrued fees.
This case highlights how crucial it is in development projects to understand and meet contractual duties exactly as written. Insolvency and missed payments can excuse performance on the other side, and failure to follow notice provisions or financing obligations can close off later claims of breach.