we're a small engineering firm that has been in business for 40 years with not one lawsuit or complaint- until now. we were helping a friend who wanted a custom house design from us. the contract called for a 3,000sf house for $40,000 & additional hours over the initial designated amount at a substantial discount. as work progressed the client wanted a larger house & finally it was up to 4,000sf after many changes. the additional costs were discounted yet again since he was a friend, & he paid right away. he priced out the house hoping we could build it for him as well but we felt we'd be more money than other buolders hwo do this all the time. he found a builder who redesigned the house, but kept many features we had in the original design. because he had that builder design as well as build the new house there was no fee for the design. over a year later the "friend" has come back seeking a partial or full refund since a) he couldn't use the plans b) he claimed we made the changes without his knowledge, c) we couldn't build it for a reasonable cost & he was forced to go somewhere else to have a redesign & build. fyi: the new design is also 4,000sf. the facts are: a) the client asked for all the changes as evidenced by his paying in full when billed, accepting the plans, taking those plans with us to vendors to get finish schedule, he used many of our features in the new house plans anyway. b) he obviously knew about the changes for the reasons above. if there was any doubt maybe he shouldn't have paid in full, which further proves our points c) we never claimed to be able to build the house at any particular cost anyway, as you can build the same house anywhere from $100/sf to $300/sf depending on finishes & costs of labor within your organization. we don't feel we need outside counsel here, just advice since he was a family friend who apparently sees a way to perhaps get a few thousand dollars back based upon lies which not only are easily disproven by the fact he happliy paid in full over a year ago, but he built the same size house with a different layout using much the same finishes & architectural details. can someone please let me know if i'm correct in my assumption that it may very well be a frivolous lawasuit should it ever get that far, or at least a baseless claim that may never amount to anything anyway please? also, should a suit be filed, what are the elements for a frivilous lawsuit counterclaim, & are the damages i should seek all punitive or what is the next step should this go further? THANK YOU for your help here, & i hope to give great advice on the design/build questions myself!

Well one thing I would redefine your defenition of a "friend". I don't know if you should try to reclaim anything if it goes to court, and he loses. SInce he did pay in full it seems the court would rule in your favor. My thinking is that since he used alot fo the original plans he won't really have a leg to stand on. However you do need to look up your business with a couple of places and see if he maybe put a complaint toward it and what the complaints said. If it seems like a slander issue, you could fight that. I had a booth renter that ordered some things in my businesses name and guess who is now paying for it so it wont go any further against my shop.Good luck with everything. NO more discounts for "friends" business is business friendships come at closing time.

__________________
"You can't fix stupid it's foreverrrrrrrrr!!" Ron White

This is in no way legal advice:

Do not solicit legal advice on an internet message board when there are thousands of dollars at stake. If you have legal questions, contact a lawyer who is familiar with these types of transactions.

There are a lot of facts missing from what you're telling us anyhow -- like what sort of contract you had, what sort of an arrangement he thought you had, his side of the story, etc.

The law is very complex. Transactional law in this state is a very interesting species of law. People go to school for a long time to be able to give advice and to work in this area.

Let me put it to you this way -- if you found out you had a brain tumor, rather than paying 'unnecessary' medical bills, why not just hop on down to the kitchen and extract that 'ol tumor with a pairing knife? Worse yet, you might post on an internet message board for advice on extracting a brain tumor...

You shouldn't do surgery on yourself, and if there is a legitimate legal contraversy here, you're not doing your business any favors by trying to represent yourself (especially if the other side has a lawyer). It might take a lawyer 15-30 minutes to answer your question -- and at least you'd know that you had received professional advice rather than uneducated amateur advice on an internet message board.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Am I reading that correctly? $40,000 for a house plan? I'm in the wrong business.

__________________
My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind
Albert Einstein

amen madmonk... Lets start a new business....lol

__________________
"You can't fix stupid it's foreverrrrrrrrr!!" Ron White

This coming from a future lawyer.

__________________
Keep away from Miss Margarita Mean...

So you think it's a good idea for one to get legal advice off of an internet message board?

ookay..

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

Hi there, the first question I would ask (and will be very pertinent in your case should it ever come to that) is this.. were these changes in the form of a work order - in other words, the original contract was amended by you and your client making changes, so did you write any sort of addendum or work order with both party signatures agreeing to the changes?

If you have those signed work orders, your friend has no case.. if it was all verbal, it might be harder to prove that he was in agreement with the changes. The fact is that he did pay for the design in full. It will be up to him to try to get the money back from you and prove that he was overcharged. From a laymans point of view, it sounds like he doesn't have a solid case.

It's like ordering a pizza, you order Supreme - pay for it, eat only the pepporoni and then demand a refund

__________________
" You've Been Thunder Struck ! "

Its easy to spend someone else's money. Huh?

This person starter this thread just to get a few free opinions. Anyone with any common sense would know not to rely 100% on a message board for advice. One may ask a question as such (only) to get an idea from someone that might be able so offer some knowledge.

My biggest question to the thread starter is why do you think this suit is frivolous?
When you are dealing business with large sums of money and one side is unhappy with the out come; then it seems to me like a valid claim that needs to be cleared up in court.

My two cents (with apologies to whichever Ogle)
Take it easy on Midtowner. Who better to offer advice on a legal question that a law student who has demonstrated a good mind on this forum. The also asked questions any opposing counsel who ask.

Sounds like a reasonable reply if you were never sued.

To get advice from an Attorney would go like this: I can’t answer your questions as I do not know what the plaintiffs Attorney intends to present at trial. You will need to retain me as your Attorney. I will have to file an answer to the plaintiffs complaint and then conduct a discovery period to know how to proceed with their demands. The courts will then request a mediation as an attempt to settle out of court, where all parties and their Attorney’s appear before a mediator whom is a neutral party. If it doesn’t settle, I will then have to command the plaintiffs to produce for deposition and then hire a stenographer to do a transcript. You can expect to pay me $500 to 1,000 for the cost of the deposition. Oh yea, the plaintiffs will also conduct a deposition on a different day. "More fees for me!" "There is my mortgage for the month." hehe

After several years of paying my fees for phone calls, letters and many hours I have to researching the case, the court will conduct a settlement conference before a judge to try and settle out of court. At that point you will have paid me 5 to 10k. If it doesn’t settle, the presiding judge will then schedule the case for trial. If it goes to trial and you lose; you will have to pay me for my services, the plaintiffs Attorneys fees, all court cost and a judgment will be entered against you.

God that vacation is going to be great this summer. Yep, being an attorney has paid off for me! (Smile)

My advice to the thread starter is as follows: Try to settle the case out of court and without an Attorney. Write a letter to their Lawyer and ask them what they want to settle. Weigh out the pros and cons. Is it worth it to pay the high cost of an Attorney to fight their claims or better to pay the plaintiffs what they want? Remember, a civil matter (with delays) can take up to four years to resolve and cost up to 20k or more.

BTW - A person can be anyone they want on the internet; that includes a Law Student. I myself, I happen to be Elvis…

Enjoy this book at amazon.com: The Rodent's Guide to Lawyers
Amazon.com: Explaining the Inexplicable: The Rodent's Guide to Lawyers: Books: Rodent

Funny, I heard this same line from a lawyer at a free consultation. Only it was removing my appendix myself… This sounds like a law school standard that is taught in all law schools across the US.

Scoff at lawyers all you want, but I have found that my money spent on attorneys fees in getting qualified advice has been well worth the cost. I would be suspect about any advice from those who have no qualified understanding of the complexities of business and contract law.

My unqualified advice to the original poster is seek professional legal advice on this matter. It may seem clear cut on its face, but its amazing how murky the legal standing gets when the gray (or insufficiently detailed) areas within contracts are exploited.

Did you miss my point?

A Lawyer will only give you 5 min's of their time for free. After that you have to retain them. An Attorney will not be able to give much advice until they research the case. Why? Because the only thing the defendant will have to present to an Attorney (at the beginning of a suit) is a complaint filed with Superior Courts. The Attorney has to do discovery to find out how to proceed with the case.

The Discovery period is where all Attorney's involved in the case gather information - evidence, proof of claims and expert witnesses.
Through the discovery period, the prosecution and defense Attorneys must exchange the information they gathered during that period so all parties know how to present their case at trial. The discovery period can be up to 18 months or so...

So how can an Attorney give much advice when he didn't do discovery and doesn't have a clue as to what the plaintiffs have against the defendant - proof, evidence or their expert witnesses?

If you went to a doctor and said, "I have a pain in my side, what is the problem?"
He would say, "we need to do tests!"

If you went to a Dentist and said, "do I have any cavities?" He would say, "I need to do an X-ray!"

If you went to an Attorney and said, "what advice can you give me?" he will say, "you need an Attorney and I require a minimum of $xxx to retain me!"

I didn't miss your point at all. You get what you pay for when you seek free professional advice.

And it goes back to this:

My advice to the thread starter is as follows: Try to settle the case out of court and without an Attorney. Write a letter to their Lawyer and ask them what they want to settle. Weigh out the pros and cons. Is it worth it to pay the high cost of an Attorney to fight their claims or better to pay the plaintiffs what they want? Remember, a civil matter (with delays) can take up to four years to resolve and cost up to 20k or more.

The difference, Superfed, is that an attorney may be able to resolve the issue faster and if it goes before a judge, can ask for attorneys fees be paid by the plaintiff if the lawsuit is found to be without merit or if the plaintiff loses.

There are indeed times where settling is the better financial option, but then there is that issue of principle and setting precedent for other clients to do the same thing down the road. But if you want to roll over and be unjustly screwed, it's a free country.

But others shouldn't let your animus toward attorneys be confused with sound, wise advice.

Brad_street,

>The difference, Superfed, is that an attorney may be able to resolve the issue faster
>if it goes before a judge, can ask for attorneys fees be paid by the plaintiff if the lawsuit
>is found to be without merit or if the plaintiff loses.

You sound like you have never been involved in a law suit.
An Attorney can not speed up the process at all. You have to realize this, (all Lawyer involvement a side) the plaintiff has to be satisfied with the opposing councils offer to settle or the case continues.

>if it goes before a judge, can ask for attorneys fees be paid by the plaintiff if the lawsuit
>is found to be without merit or if the plaintiff loses.

For the defendant to get Attorneys fees paid, they would have to file a counter claim and win.

The only time a case goes before a judge is: Firstly, a settlement hearing where both parties make a proposed settlement offer. At a settlement hearing, neither party has to settle if they are not satisfied with the opposing councils offer and the judge can not make either side settle if they chose not to. Secondly, if the case does not settle, the presiding judge will schedule the case for trial. Keep in mind, there may be a jury demand.

Question: Have you every been involved in a legal battle? I have!

The only advice an Attorney will give you is whether you need an Attorney or not. We all know what the answer to that will be.

To date, I have not personally been the subject of a law suit, nor have I personally filed a law suit against another person or company. However, a close friend of mine recently (in the last three years) went through a law suit with former business partners which took a little over two years to resolve. I practically lived through the lawsuit with him. If that disqualifies me in your eyes, so be it.

First, I said an attorney may be able to help resolve the issue faster; I didn't claim that all attorneys always make the issue resolve faster.

Secondly, in some cases, attorneys do in fact resolve the issue before it ever gets before a judge. Case in point, a client of mine was able to resolve a trademark infringement dispute with a single letter from his attorney, averting any further legal action. The attorney was able to speak to the issue with authority and expertise and convince the opposing party it would be unwise on his part to pursue the matter further. Prior to the attorney getting involved, the other party was more antagonistic and, frankly, hostile. In this case, the attorney's legal counsel and involvement prevented more costly and protracted legal wrangling.

In the case of my friend, his attorney was able to successfully argue for the opposing side to pay attorney's fees even while the legal case was in process. A good attorney will know what the law allows for.

That may have been your experience, but my friend's experience included several appearances before the judge to hear motions filed by attorneys on both sides before any settlement hearings began.

I answered your question earlier in this post. But you should also keep in mind that your experience probably does not represent a hard-and-fast rule about how all cases are or should be handled.

The only advice my doctor gives me when I ask about a symptom or possible sickness is that I need to see a doctor. I wonder why that would be. Could it be that it's best to seek advice from an expert professional about a complex issue rather than rely on an untrained lay person's advice?

Like I said previously, you get what you pay for when it comes to legal advice. If the original poster wants to go through his case without an attorney, more power to him. I just wouldn't want to risk it. But that's me.

>However, a close friend of mine recently (in the last three years) went through a law suit
>with former business partners which took a little over two years to resolve. I practically
>lived through the lawsuit with him. If that disqualifies me in your eyes, so be it.

The case took over two years, so where is the quick resolution? You are also leaving out many details.
1. What type of case was it?
2. Money spent on Attorneys fees?
3. Is your friend satisfied with the end result?
4. Was he/she the plaintiff or defendant?
Your argument has been "how Attorneys can archive a quick resolution." So yes, this statement contradicts your theory.

Trademark infringement issues are easier to resolution then a case like the one in this thread.
1. Did a person make a substantial amount of money using someone else's Mark and
2. Did the other party lose money due to the infringement?
Trademark or Servicemark infringement, in most cases resolves as follows: (innocently, a mark can be infringed upon) Agree to not use the "Mark" and the case will be dismissed.

>Secondly, in some cases, attorneys do in fact resolve the issue before it ever gets before a judge.

In the end, its up to the plaintiff to settle for what the defendant has to offer.

>The only advice my doctor gives me when I ask about a symptom or possible sickness is that I need to see a doctor. I wonder why that would be.

1. Doctors “milk” insurance companies.
2. A civil suit may cost thousands of dollars vs. a doctor visit costing under $200 and is covered by insurance.
I don't see an equal comparison here?

>Like I said previously, you get what you pay for when it comes to legal advice.

Unfortunately when you are the defendant, you are forced to “Get What You Pay For.”
Hopefully you find a good Attorney or else you will have a double negative.

I stand by what I said. If you don't want to use an attorney, don't.

Currently, I am the defendant, involved in a defamation suit. I am acting Pro Se so I haven't spent a dime on Attorneys fees. This case was filed in 2004 and thus far I have had numerous free consultations with lawyers. The word I have received from them is that defamation is very hard to prove. The plaintiff has to prove that "words" cased "financial damages" or the case will be dismissed.

So far I have been to mediation and two settlement hearings before a judge. The plaintiffs Attorney proposed a settlement order which I didn't not agree and I offered a counter proposal, sign it, then mailed it to the plaintiffs Attorney and the presiding judge. I also mailed a cover letter stating; if this is not feasibly to your client, please proceed with trial so I can clear my good name.
This is my out look: Bring it on, and lets Rock!!!

In this case, I think that their Attorney is a Shark, and has taken them to the edge of a cliff and now he has to drop them off. Of course he will send the plaintiff the final bill. There is a sucker born every minute!

In a case that involves an insurance company i.e. accident claim and the Attorney will take the case on a contingency, by all means - hire him!!!

Hmmm...after reading this thread this does not surprise me.

To defame someone's character - you have to say something about someone that is not true, causing injury to their reputation and causing them to suffer financial loss or emotional distress. It also has to be done with malice or the plaintiff must demand a retraction. Then the defendant has within seven days to issue a retraction. (applicable in certain states)

As long as a comment is stated as an opinion not fact, the first amendment, "freedom of speech" protects.
If it is said with an honest belief "in truth" on a matter of public interest - it is dismissible.

I can write a book about this subject. Please don't get me started, I am busy... hehe

You should charge outrageous amounts of money to solve people's legal problems.