Preliminary Case Assessment

Filing Party	[Filing Party Name] — [Company Name]
Responding Party	[Responding Party Name] — [Company Name]
Contract Reference	[Master Services Agreement dated March 1, 2024]
Amount at Issue	[$125,000.00]

Section 1

Contract Summary

The following summary is based on the contract documents submitted by the filing party.

Contract Type	[Master Services Agreement]
Effective Date	[March 1, 2024]
Term	[24 months with auto-renewal]
Governing Law	[State of Texas]
Dispute Resolution	[Section 12.3 — Mediation, then binding arbitration per AAA Commercial Rules]

Key Provisions Identified

Payment Terms (§4.2): [Net 30 from invoice date; 1.5% monthly late fee]
Scope of Services (§2.1): [Consulting services for digital transformation, deliverables per Exhibit A]
Termination (§11.1): [Either party may terminate with 30 days written notice; immediate termination for material breach after 15-day cure period]
Limitation of Liability (§9.3): [Capped at total fees paid in prior 12-month period]

Section 2

Dispute Overview

[The filing party alleges that the responding party failed to deliver the agreed-upon consulting services as specified in Exhibit A of the Master Services Agreement. Specifically, the filing party states that three of five project milestones were not completed by the contracted deadlines, and the deliverables that were submitted did not meet the quality standards outlined in the agreement.]

Claims Identified

[Breach of contract — failure to deliver services per Exhibit A milestones]
[Recovery of payments made for undelivered services ($85,000)]
[Consequential damages from project delays ($40,000 estimated)]

Total Amount at Issue

$125,000.00

[$85,000 direct + $40,000 consequential damages]

Section 3

Contract Analysis

Based on the contract provisions and information submitted, the following analysis has been generated.

Relevant Provisions

[The contract includes specific milestone dates in Exhibit A (§2.1) and defines "Satisfactory Completion" in §1.4 as deliverables that meet the specifications and are accepted by the client within the review period. Section 4.2 ties payment to milestone completion, and §9.1 addresses remedies for non-performance.]

Application to Claims

[The milestone-based payment structure in §4.2 supports the filing party's position that payment was contingent on delivery. However, §6.2 includes a "change order" provision that may apply if scope modifications were discussed during the engagement. The filing party's documentation includes email correspondence but no formal change orders.]

Ambiguities or Gaps

[The definition of "Satisfactory Completion" in §1.4 is somewhat subjective and may be interpreted differently by each party]
[The contract does not explicitly address partial delivery — whether partial credit applies if some but not all milestone requirements were met]
[The consequential damages claim may be limited by the liability cap in §9.3]

Section 4

Position Assessment

This assessment is based only on the filing party's submission. The responding party's position has not been considered.

Strengths of Position

[Clear milestone dates in Exhibit A with documented non-delivery]
[Payment tied to completion per §4.2]
[Email evidence of filing party raising concerns in a timely manner]
[No formal change orders modifying the original scope]

Potential Weaknesses

[Subjective quality standards may be difficult to prove]
[Consequential damages may exceed liability cap]
[No formal written notice of breach per §11.1 cure period requirements]
[Continued payments after missed milestones could imply acceptance]

Areas Where Additional Documentation Would Strengthen the Case

[Written notice of breach, if sent, per §11.1 requirements]
[Documented acceptance/rejection of partial deliverables]
[Evidence of consequential damages (third-party invoices, lost revenue documentation)]

Section 5

Suggested Resolution Range

Based on the contract terms, submitted documentation, and the analysis above, the following resolution range is suggested. This range reflects the filing party's position only and may shift once the responding party provides their perspective.

$0 Suggested Range $125,000

$55,000 — $95,000

Basis for Range

[The lower end ($55,000) accounts for the possibility that partial deliverables may offset some of the claimed amount and that the liability cap in §9.3 may limit consequential damages. The upper end ($95,000) reflects the strong documentation of non-delivery for three milestones and the milestone-contingent payment structure. The full claim amount of $125,000 is less likely to be sustained given the ambiguity around partial delivery and the liability cap.]

Section 6

Recommended Path

Based on the strength of your position, the nature of the dispute, and the relationship between the parties, the following guidance may help you decide how to proceed.

Your Situation	Suggested Path	Why
[Strong position, business relationship worth preserving]	Settlement Negotiation	[Your position is well-supported by the contract terms. Structured negotiation gives you the best chance of a fair outcome while preserving the business relationship for future work.]
[Strong position, relationship is not a priority]	Settlement or Arbitration	[Settlement is typically faster. Arbitration delivers a binding, enforceable award — useful if you expect the other party to resist a negotiated outcome.]
[Mixed or uncertain position]	Settlement Negotiation	[When both sides have credible arguments, settlement lets you find middle ground without an all-or-nothing decision. Lower risk, more control over the outcome.]
[Position has significant weaknesses]	Settle or Consider Closing	[The assessment identifies gaps that could weaken your case. Negotiating a reasonable settlement now may yield a better result than proceeding to a binding decision.]
[Dispute may involve issues outside JustResolv's scope]	Consult an Attorney	[Claims involving fraud, intellectual property, regulatory issues, or amounts above $250,000 may require traditional legal channels. An attorney can advise on the best approach.]

For This Case

[Based on the analysis above, settlement negotiation appears to be the strongest path. Your contract terms are clear on milestone-based payment, and you have documentation of non-delivery. However, the ambiguity around partial delivery and the liability cap suggest that a negotiated resolution in the $55,000–$95,000 range is more likely than recovering the full $125,000. Settlement negotiation would allow you to reach a resolution quickly without the uncertainty of a binding decision on the consequential damages question.]

Not Legal Advice

This recommended path is generated by AI based on the information you submitted and the contract terms. It is not legal advice and should not be treated as a substitute for professional legal counsel. Every dispute has unique circumstances. You are encouraged to consult with a licensed attorney before making decisions about your dispute.

Section 7

Next Steps

Based on this preliminary assessment, the following options are available to you. You may also wish to seek advice from a licensed attorney at any time — legal counsel is not mutually exclusive with the JustResolv process, and an attorney can help you evaluate your options at any stage.

1

Wait for Respondent

The responding party has been notified and invited to participate. They will receive reminder emails over the next several days. If they engage, their input may change the assessment and open a path to negotiated resolution. You will be notified of any activity on your case.

2

Send Formal Notice

If the responding party does not engage within the response window, you can download and customize a Formal Notice of Dispute to send directly — documenting your good-faith effort to resolve the matter.

3

Propose Escalation to Arbitration

After reviewing this assessment, you may decide to propose escalating to binding arbitration for a definitive resolution. If the other party agrees, the arbitration process will use all information already submitted — no need to start over.

4

Close the Dispute

If this assessment suggests the dispute may not be worth pursuing further, you can close the case at any time. This assessment is yours to keep regardless — it may still be useful for your records or future reference.

💡 Tip: You can download this assessment as a PDF using your browser's Print function (File → Print → Save as PDF), or share it directly with your attorney or business partners. This document is yours — use it however it's most helpful to you.