Review GRISWOLD AND RAUMA, ARCHITECTS, INC. v$.$ AESCULAPIUS CORP $($Sweet$,$ pp$.195-198).$ Consider the details of the case then address each of the following:

After the first cost estimate given in June $1,1970,$ no further cost estimates were ever conveyed to the client. Should the architect have raised the topic on a periodic basis?

The architect used two different rates$-$per$-$square$-$foot methods to estimate construction costs. Given the results in this case $-$ that the low bid was so much higher $-$ are these methods deficient?

Explain how the details of this case illustrate the common law process in operation.