David Desgro hired Paul Pack to inspect a house that Desgro wanted to buy. Pack had Desgro sign a standard-form contract that included a twelve-month limit for claims based on the agreement. Pack reported that the house had no major problems, but after Desgro bought it, he discovered issues with the plumbing, insulation, heat pump, and floor support. Thirteen months after the inspection, Desgro filed a suit in a Tennessee state court against Pack. Was Desgro's complaint filed too late, or was the contract's twelve-month limit unenforceable? Discuss. [Desgro v. Pack, 2013 WL 84899 (Tenn. App. 2013) ] (See Adhesion Contracts and Unconscionability.) Miller, Roger LeRoy. Business Law: Text & Cases - The First Course - Summarized Case Edition (p. 274). Cengage Learning. Kindle Edition.

Desgro's complaint was filed too late. With this being stated, the suit would be dismissed because the contract explicitly states that complaints have to be within the 12 month timespan.

Explanation:

Desgro's complaint was filed too late. With this being stated, the suit would be dismissed because the contract explicitly states that complaints have to be within the 12 month timespan due to the fact that Desgro discovered issues with the plumbing, insulation, heat pump, and floor support after buying the house in which he decided to filled a suit in a Tennessee state court against Pack after Thirteen months which was after the inspection and after signing the standard-form contract that included a twelve-month limit for claims based on the agreement which is why the suit would be dismissed because the contract explicitly states that complaints have to be within the 12 month timespan which Desgro failed to comply with.