A Clear Contract May Not Avoid a Lawsuit Over Its Terms

A printer filed a small claims action against a customer for non-payment of a printing order. The dispute occurred because printer used the prior year’s date on the material produced instead of the current year’s date. The printer defended the bill saying that the content was supplied by the customer and any error the customer’s fault. The customer resisted by insisting that the printer should have sent a proof to the customer for review prior to printing.  Applying law, the court, in Mek v DePaul 2013-Ohio-4486, said that when parties have agreed about issues critical to the transaction, the courts will determine the meaning of ambiguous terms according to the parties’ mutual understanding, the custom and practice in the trade or community, or other established legal principals.  Applying this rule, the court said that since the contract did not provide for a proof and since the contract specified that all terms were in the writing, the customer was out of luck and judgment was affirmed for the printer. IMPACT:   Even if contracts are clear, perhaps consumer transaction should be drafted go above and beyond. Businesses should try to draft consumer contract at a standard way above the minimum in order to avoid the chance of having to litigate consumer collections.