Wright v. Pennamped
Indiana Court of Appeals
657 N.E.2d 1223 (1995)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
Donald Wright (plaintiff) was refinancing an apartment complex. Wright accepted a proposal from Ray Krebs of SCI Financial Corporation (SCI) (defendant). Attorney Bruce Pennamped (defendant) prepared the loan documents for SCI and forwarded drafts to Wright’s attorney, Richard Brown. Wright and Brown discussed the documents and approved their form and substance. The day before closing, Pennamped discussed the documents with Brown but never mentioned that the funding bank had requested changes to the prepayment-penalty provision. Brown advised Pennamped he would not be attending the closing. That afternoon, Pennamped changed the prepayment provision. Pennamped told Krebs to tell Wright, but neither Wright nor Brown was advised. Wright executed the documents and first learned when paying off the loan that the changes increased the prepayment penalty by $92,000. Wright sued Pennamped and his law firm for fraud and constructive fraud. The trial court granted summary judgment to Pennamped, finding no evidence of intent to deceive. Wright appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sharpnack, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
