4 ms·

This is pointed out in the followup comments: If a contract has been marked up - then it is merely a counteroffer. However, it also means that there is no basis

This is pointed out in the followup comments: If a contract has been marked up - then it is merely a counteroffer. However, it also means that there is no basis for a lawsuit, as there was never a valid contract.

tptacek 16y ago
Contracts are still valid if they have markup on them; both parties just initial the changes, or the changes are dated and initialed.
- AgentConundrum 16y ago
  Yes, but until both parties initial the changes, a modified contract is still just a counter-offer, right?
  - tptacek 16y ago
    I'm sure that's true. I'm just saying, contracts aren't mystically invalidated because they have handwriting on them. The signatures themselves are just evidence of the underlying agreement, which is what's enforceable.
    - sophacles 16y ago
      Yeah, didn't mean to imply that -- just poor wording on my part.
flipbrad 16y ago
IANAL, but from what I see, in this case there is a contract, if the two of you started doing business. It might, or might not, be the one you handed that wasn't throw back in your face. if they filed it, still have it, refer to it in deciding how much to pay you, what work you need to be doing for them, etc - those are all very good signs that's the one. or it might be oral, implied, etc. The court would probably recognise all the terms that weren't in dispute (i.e. the ones you didn't black out). These things vary with the court, the judge, the jurisdiction... what is certain (which you said) is that you can't be sued for the term you blacked out; there's little conceivable way you can be held to have agreed to that. what is said above about arbitration clauses seems to me to be wonderful advice. Because the above just isn't the case in front of an arbitrator. They might well decide that the fair decision is that even though you blacked out the line, you are still in the wrong - for misleading the company, breaching a very similar implied term, or else. Cut it out.

tptacek 16y ago

Contracts are still valid if they have markup on them; both parties just initial the changes, or the changes are dated and initialed.

AgentConundrum 16y ago
Yes, but until both parties initial the changes, a modified contract is still just a counter-offer, right?
- tptacek 16y ago
  I'm sure that's true. I'm just saying, contracts aren't mystically invalidated because they have handwriting on them. The signatures themselves are just evidence of the underlying agreement, which is what's enforceable.
  - sophacles 16y ago
    Yeah, didn't mean to imply that -- just poor wording on my part.

flipbrad 16y ago

IANAL, but from what I see, in this case there is a contract, if the two of you started doing business. It might, or might not, be the one you handed that wasn't throw back in your face. if they filed it, still have it, refer to it in deciding how much to pay you, what work you need to be doing for them, etc - those are all very good signs that's the one. or it might be oral, implied, etc. The court would probably recognise all the terms that weren't in dispute (i.e. the ones you didn't black out). These things vary with the court, the judge, the jurisdiction... what is certain (which you said) is that you can't be sued for the term you blacked out; there's little conceivable way you can be held to have agreed to that. what is said above about arbitration clauses seems to me to be wonderful advice. Because the above just isn't the case in front of an arbitrator. They might well decide that the fair decision is that even though you blacked out the line, you are still in the wrong - for misleading the company, breaching a very similar implied term, or else. Cut it out.