Wednesday, December 18, 2013

George v. Davoli case brief

George v. Davoli case brief summary
397 N.Y.S.2d 895 (1977)

Plaintiff buyer filed an action against defendant seller after the buyer tendered the return of the jewelry and demanded the return of his purchase price, and the seller refused to accept the jewelry or to return the money. The seller testified about an oral agreement between the buyer and seller to the effect that the jewelry had to be returned by the following Monday evening, or the sale would be deemed completed.

The buyer was not present at trial, and the seller testified about the oral agreement over the objection of the buyer's attorney.


  • The court found that the absence of an agreed upon time limit was an omission which came within the area provided for in U.C.C. § 2-202. 
  • There was nothing inconsistent with the seller's testimony inasmuch as the written memorandum made no reference to the time of return of the merchandise.
  • It could not be said that the written memorandum was a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement because the time of return was an important part of the arrangement between the parties.
  • Therefore, the court found that parol evidence as to the agreement setting forth the time within which the merchandise was to be returned if not acceptable, was admissible to supplement the written memorandum. 
  • Because the parol evidence as to such agreement was unrebutted, the court found that the buyer failed to comply with the parties' agreement to the return of the goods by Monday evening, the consequence of which was that title therein passed to the buyer, and the seller was under no legal obligation to accept the return thereof.

The court dismissed the buyer's complaint.

Suggested law school course materials, hornbooks, and guides for Contract Law

Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.