Ellig v. Molina
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
996 F. Supp. 2d 236 (2014)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Mr. Ellig (plaintiff) was discussing with Alfred Molina (defendant) the possibility of buying a diamond ring for Mrs. Ellig (plaintiff). During the discussion, Molina stated that if the Elligs did not like the ring for any reason, they could return it within one year of purchase, and Molina would buy it back for 10 percent above the purchase price. In discussing the proposed purchase with Mrs. Ellig, Molina made the same buyback guarantee. The guarantee was never reduced to writing. The Elligs purchased the ring in June 2011 for over $600,000 but were not happy with it. The Elligs decided to return the ring and informed Molina of that decision within one year of the purchase date. In July 2012, Molina sent the Elligs a letter that confirmed the purchase and Molina’s guarantee. However, the letter stated that Molina needed to resell the diamond before he could repay the Elligs. This requirement was not part of the original oral agreement, and the Elligs did not agree to the requirement. The Elligs brought suit against Molina, alleging breach of contract. Molina claimed that the contract was barred by the statute of frauds.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Forrest, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
