Issue
The parties, Ryan Paul and Dusty Rhoades, have a conflict based on an oral contract entered into to rebuild a house. The parties disagree over the cost overruns agreed upon in the contract; however, there is no evidence or detailed explanation of what constitutes “restoration.” The work performed by Dusty Rhoades had a higher value than Ryan Paul had estimated, but the parties did not discuss the characteristics of the transaction.
Decision
Ryan Paul must pay only the $30,000 agreed upon as part of the original deal. Rhoades must provide all reports related to the carpentry work and reimburse the $18,000 compensation to the subcontractors themselves. Paul should confirm that the additional cost of services was not negotiated during the process of amending the original agreement and that Roads did not claim them. The terms of the original deal should be deemed to have been fulfilled, and the second deal should be invalidated due to unintentional misrepresentation.
Support
First, neither party agreed to the term “restoration,” so the full scope of work (excluding carpentry) was not implied. Second, Rhoades should have warned Paul of the increase in the cost of the services under the new terms of the deal. Since this was unproduced, the fact of misrepresentation and duress cannot be set aside. Third, Rhoades was aware of the quantity and quality of services to be provided to Paul and could calculate the approximate cost accordingly. The provision of services from above should have been negotiated with the subcontractors, and it can be assumed that Rhoads’ new cost is not objective.
Dissent
It could be argued that Rhoades performed all of the work that Paul meant by carpentry, although the parties did not agree on the word “restoration.” In addition, Paul agreed that additional services related to the restoration, such as electrical and plumbing, were required and agreed to subcontract them. These services were also entirely performed. Finally, without these services, Rhoades’ work may indeed have been impossible, so the terms of the original deal cannot be honored without modifications to it. In this case, Paul must cover the entire $48,000 because the work performed cannot go unpaid.