Bewley v. Miller

In March 1973, Robert Miller (defendant) enrolled as a student at a Fred Astaire Dance Studio (the dance studio) in Washington, D.C. Miller’s enrollment agreement was signed on the dance studio’s behalf by James Hash, who was the dance studio’s licensee and operator at the time. Miller’s enrollment agreement provided that Miller would pay $1,430 for 200 hours of dance lessons to be completed within one year of the agreement’s signing. The agreement obligated Miller to pay $1,100 of the contract price in 11 equal monthly installments. The enrollment agreement provided that the agreement was made solely between Miller and the licensee of the dance studio (i.e., Hash) and that neither Fred Astaire nor any other person or corporation would be bound by the agreement. In August 1973, during Miller’s enrollment-agreement term, Hash sold his license to operate the dance studio to Billy Bewley (plaintiff). Hash assigned to Bewley all outstanding contracts for dance instruction, including Miller’s contract. Bewley continued providing Miller with dance lessons. Miller accepted the dance lessons without objecting to the dance studio’s transfer of ownership and continued making payments under the enrollment agreement until December 1973. By March 30, 1974, when Miller’s one-year enrollment-agreement term expired, Miller had completed only 180.5 hours of dance lessons and still owed the dance studio $600. Bewley, as assignee of the claim for the money that Miller owed to Hash, sued Miller to recover the $600 contract balance. Miller moved to dismiss, asserting that the enrollment agreement stated that only Hash and Miller were bound by the agreement’s terms. The trial court granted Miller’s motion to dismiss after construing the asserted language of the enrollment agreement as a nonassignability clause that precluded Hash from assigning the debt owed by Miller. Bewley appealed.