Court Opinion

ID: 9508871
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:39:56.35671+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:40.768345
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE HUNT,
dissenting:
T dissent. A lawyer is more than a scrivener. He is a professional and a counselor upon whose advice a client, whether skilled in the law or not, should be able to depend. If the client must know as much as the lawyer in order to oversee the lawyer’s work and discover his errors, then the lawyer is nothing more than a scrivener.
When a client, patient, taxpayer or builder comes to rely upon a professional for services or advice he most often cannot discover that a negligent act has occurred until damages arise. I do not believe that the plaintiffs here were required to know that the legal jargon cited by the majority did not constitute a savings clause. In both paragraphs cited by the majority, the words “ninety (90) days” were used. When they read those paragraphs, the plaintiffs, who were lay persons, could reasonably have believed that they had a period of grace in which they could remit any late payments.
Plaintiffs could not reasonably have discovered the omission in the contract until the damages occurred, that is, when they lost their property. They should have an opportunity to present their case to the jury.