AZ STATECourt of Appeals of Arizona
1993

AROK Construction Co. v. Indian Construction Services

848 P.2d 870Court of Appeals of Arizona • Decided 1993Remanded
Change OrderFlow-DownCited 45 times

HOLDING

AROK Construction agreed verbally with Indian Construction Services to perform drywall and stucco work, but the written contract had missing terms. The trial court threw out the case, saying no valid contract existed. Arizona's Court of Appeals reversed this decision, ruling that an oral subcontract can be enforceable even with missing terms if both parties clearly intended to be bound, agreed on scope and price, and a breach can be proven with an appropriate remedy.

KEY FINDINGS

Change Order

Oral subcontracts are valid in Arizona if you can prove both parties intended to be bound and agreed on the main terms (scope and price)

Flow-Down

Missing contract terms are not automatically fatal—focus on documenting intent and agreement on scope and price through emails, texts, or witness testimony

FULL COURT OPINION