Warning
Info
- - tl;dr
- - ICRA
- - Facts & Holding
- - DeepDive
1 0
New York Supreme Court - 434 N.Y.S.2d 82, 107 Misc. 2d 201
Tags: Contracts, Indefiniteness
tl;dr:
A man grew accustomed to a lavish lifestyle funded by a wealthy benefactress and sued for $1.5 million after their relationship ended. The agreement alleged by the man was too indefinite to be enforceable.Video Summary
Case Summary
In Trimmer v. Van Bomel (1980), a man brought a lawsuit against his former lover, a wealthy widow, claiming she'd broken an oral agreement to provide him a luxurious lifestyle in return for his company and assistance. The court dismissed the case, stating that the alleged contract was too unclear and uncertain to enforce. Additionally, the court found that there was no consideration, as the plaintiff didn't sacrifice anything or experience any disadvantage by living with the defendant. The plaintiff's trustworthiness and intentions were also questioned, implying he was only pursuing a financial gain after receiving numerous presents and money from the defendant.
This case demonstrates the challenges in enforcing oral contracts, particularly in personal relationships with ambiguous promises. It also showcases the court's hesitance to meddle in private matters between consenting adults unless enforceable agreements are present. Furthermore, the case emphasizes the necessity of consideration, which is the exchange of benefits and drawbacks, in creating binding contracts.
DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition
The plaintiff, a travel tour operator, is suing the defendant, an elderly widow, for failing to compensate him for their five-year relationship. The plaintiff claims they had an oral agreement in which he provided companionship and services, and the defendant covered all his expenses for extravagant living and paid him enough to maintain his luxurious lifestyle for life. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the alleged agreement is too vague and indefinite to be enforced, lacks consideration, and that the plaintiff has already been paid more than the value of any services provided. The court held that an implied contract to compensate for personal services between unmarried persons living together or unmarried persons whose actions stem from mutual friendship and reciprocal regard should not be recognized. The court dismissed the second cause of action, founded in implied contract, as the plaintiff had already received a substantial amount of money from the defendant during their relationship. The court acknowledged the plaintiff's allegation of an express agreement with the defendant to set up a fund that would allow the plaintiff to live in a luxurious manner for the rest of his life, but noted that the validity of the alleged express oral contract must be tested in the same way as other contracts. The defendant has filed another motion for summary judgment based on the complete record before the court.
LSD+ Case Briefs
Features
- DeepDive for detailed case analysis
- Over 50,000 existing case briefs
- Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
- Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
- Social learning with chat and high points
Over 50,000 Cases Briefed
LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.
14-Day Free Trial
Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.
Integrated Legal Dictionary
Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.
Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.
DeepDive
DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.
Brief anything. Instantly.
Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.
Social Learning with Chat and High Points
Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.
Real-Time Brief Feedback
Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.