Liggett v. Young
Indiana Supreme Court
877 N.E.2d 178 (2007)
- Written by Carolyn Strutton, JD
Facts
Ronald Liggett (plaintiff) was a builder. Liggett built a house for his attorney, Dean Young (defendant), and Young’s wife. Young and Liggett used a standard preprinted construction contract, but Young drafted and added an additional paragraph to the contract that prohibited changes to the scope of the project unless made in writing. A supplier who provided materials for the home’s construction sued Liggett. In response to that suit, Liggett initiated a third-party complaint against the Youngs, alleging that the parties had verbally agreed to change orders that added substantial cost to the project. The Youngs filed a counterclaim against Liggett, alleging negligent and untimely work under the building contract and invoking the provision in the contract that prohibited verbal change orders. The trial court granted partial summary judgment and a final judgment in favor of the Youngs as to all of Liggett’s claims against them. Liggett appealed, alleging that the trial court had erred in finding no genuine issue of material fact as to the enforceability of the contract as drafted between an attorney and his client.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dickson, J.)
Concurrence (Boehm, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.
