Double AA Builders, Ltd. v. Grand State Construction LLC
Arizona Court of Appeals
114 P.3d 835 (2005)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
Grand State Construction LLC (Grand State) (defendant) faxed a bid to Double AA Builders, Ltd. (Double AA) (plaintiff) to act as a subcontractor on a project on which Double AA was bidding to be the general contractor. Grand State’s bid described the scope of the work to be done, set Grand State’s price, provided for payment every 30 days, and stated that the quoted price would be good for 30 days. Double AA submitted its general contractor bid to the owner and was awarded the contract. Double AA then sent a subcontract to Grand State within 30 days of receiving its subcontractor bid. Grand State refused to sign the contract or perform. Double AA sued based on promissory estoppel. The superior court awarded Double AA the difference between Grand State’s bid and the replacement bid, but denied Double AA’s request for attorney’s fees under § 12-341.01(A) of the Arizona statutes. Grand State appealed the award of damages, and Double AA appealed the denial of attorney’s fees.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gemmill, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.