Berkel & Co. Contractors, Inc. v. Palm & Assoc., Inc.

I respectfully dissent.

I believe the trial court erred when it entered summary judgment in favor of *662Palm because the Purchase Order at issue here does not "fulfill{ ] the office of a valid, binding, and exclusive contract" between the parties Dayhuff v. Canonie Constr. Co., 152 Ind.App. 154, 156, 283 N.E.2d 425, 427 (1972). The Purchase Order issued by Berkel did not specify a fixed time for completion of the work, any estimated number of hours for which Palm would be paid, nor any guaranteed minimum payment to Palm. The Purchase Order merely set forth the scope of the surveying work required…