Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
From our private database of 18,800+ case briefs...

DF Activities Corporation v. Brown

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
851 F.2d 920 (1988)



DF Activities Corporation (DF) (plaintiff) is led by an enthusiast of the work of Frank Lloyd Wright. Dorothea Brown (defendant) lived in a house designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, and owned a chair also designed by Wright. DF instructed its art director, Ann Briggs, to negotiate with Brown to convince her to sell the chair to DF. Briggs alleges that on November 26th, Brown agreed to sell the chair to DF for $60,000, payable in two installments. Brown denies ever making this agreement. On December 3rd, Briggs sent a letter to Brown confirming the agreement to sell the chair, and followed this with a check for $30,000. Brown returned the check and the letter, and wrote on the letter that she never agreed to a contract and had made “other arrangements” for the chair. Brown later sold the chair for $198,000. DF brought suit against Brown in United States district court, seeking the difference between the price at which the chair was sold and the contract price of $60,000. Brown sought to dismiss the suit as barred by the statute of frauds for the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). Brown also submitted a sworn affidavit saying that she never agreed to sell the chair to DF or Briggs, and denying any recollection of a conversation with Briggs on November 26th. The district judge granted Brown’s motion to dismiss, and DF appealed. On appeal, DF argued that although the UCC statute of frauds requires contracts for the sale of goods priced over $500 to be in writing, the alleged oral contract between Brown and Briggs should be enforceable if DF can force Brown to admit to the existence of the contract in a judicial pleading, testimony, or otherwise in court. To accomplish this, DF requests the opportunity to complete additional discovery and depose Brown.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)

Dissent (Flaum, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 498,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 498,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 18,800 briefs, keyed to 985 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Questions & Answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial