Leaving early without making alternative arrangements for delivery is not acting reasonably. So by default, the closing time of the show and the place of the contract is reasonable delivery time/place. It should be foreseeable that the time/place of product delivery would be an issue to the contract, and without warning from the other party, the purchasing party could reasonably assume the signer would be there until the announced closing time of the show-I don't recall if she stated she had to leave early and thus could not hold the stickers. Here, there was a problem with delivering the signed stickers back to the other party. In any contract, both parties are obligated to act reasonably and in good faith in making the contract and in performing the obligations they undertake.
Thus, the original contract appears to be binding to the parties. That there was no writing evidencing the original contract does not invalidate the original contract (not over dollar amount specified by law to require writing, not requiring more than 1 year to perform, etc). She also said she's willing to answer more questions about this.Īny more questions from the peanut gallery?Īny more questions from the peanut gallery?***Final-no more rewrites 7:24 pm 12/9***Ģ-did the original deal specify when/where/how the stickers when signed were to be gotten back to him?ģ-what proof is there that the stickers were signed by you?Ĥ-did you discuss other remedies to his not getting the stickers? such as did you offer to sign 500 more stickers rather than return the $500? return only part of the money as compensation for the opportunity cost?ĥ-given that she had to leave, did she make arrangements with someone (such as the show manager/organizer) to hold the stickers until the other party returned to pick them up? (that would seem a reasonable thing to do under the circumstances).įrom the evidence provided so far, in my opinion she owes the money.there appears to have been a contract made to which there was no evidence by writing, there was fault claimed with the performance of the contract (non-delivery) and then the parties agreed/made a 2nd contract to remedy the fault in the a original contract by the return of the compensation ($500), and lastly the 2nd contract was deliberately breached (payment of 2nd agreement check stopped). Her lawyer told her that she didn't actually owe him that money, so she stopped payment on the check She reluctantly agreed and wrote him a check. Later (at another autograph show?), Scott claimed that she owed him the $500 back, since he never got the signed stickers back from her. Scott paid her $500 for signing stickers for trading cards during an autograph show I thought I would do him a favor and sign them even though I knew I would probably lose out on money. That would have only been 25 photos I missed out on for make that $500. I lost out of autograph sales while I was signing them. He said I did the work, he didn’t come get them as promised before you left the show. Later that day my lawyer came by the autograph show and said you did what? I told him I wrote him a check for the money. He then came at me during an autograph show saying I owed him this money. I took a big chuck of time out of a very busy autograph show to get them done for him before I flew. He was going to do these trading cards and so I signed stickers for those trading cards.
0 kommentar(er)
