How have the courts dealt with a claim for breach of a contract for the construction of a home?

Defendant raises issues concerning the sufficiency of the evidence. He argues that the evidence fails to support certain allegations of the complaint. In this regard we note that the allegations of the complaint which defendant now states are not supported by the evidence do not form the basis of the trial court's judgment. The findings of fact state that plaintiffs and defendants entered into a contract for the construction of a home, that the home was constructed and defendant was paid in full, and that defendant breached the agreement by materially deviating from the plans and specifications and by general sloppy and unworkmanlike construction. The damages awarded were for breach of [101 Cal.App.3d 313] contract in this manner. Where findings are made upon issues which determine the cause and uphold the judgment, other issues become immaterial and the failure to find thereon does not constitute prejudicial error. (Santoro v. Carbone (1972) 22 Cal.App.3d 721, 730-731, 99 Cal.Rptr. 488.) The allegations of the complaint which do not provide the basis of the judgment are irrelevant and we need not consider whether the evidence supports those allegations.