Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P is a widow living alone. She is 68 years old. After her husband's death P worked at Bishops as a 'coffee girl.' She went to the D Studio in 1954 as a gift from a friend. D was invited to return a few days later. When she returned, she was interviewed by the manager and sold a small course of dancing lessons. Eventually, D sold P 3222 hours of dancing instruction for which she paid $21,020.50. In all, according to the testimony P paid $33,497 for 4057 hours of instruction. With refunds and credits, P paid at least $29,174.30. On May 2, 1955, when P bought 1200 additional hours of instruction for $6000 she had already bought 2022 hours and had used only 261 hours. P got lifetime memberships and free attendance to weekly dances for life and two hours of instruction or practice a month to keep active on what had been learned. P got three-lifetime memberships. P attended the weekly dances and incidental entertainments and admitted having fun. P was told she would be a professional dancer. P was no match for D's highly trained instructors. P was even awarded a Bronze Medal, then a Silver Medal and then a Gold Medal. These awards were given P all in the same year although D's manager testified that it takes approximately two to four years to qualify for a Bronze Medal, five to seven years for a Silver Medal and anytime after 1200 hours a student could qualify for the Gold Medal. From 1957 through the fall of 1960 P's dancing ability did not improve. P even gave her 25-year-old regular instructor a diamond ring for his birthday in 1960. When P quit, she still had 1750 hours of unused time that she had purchased. P employed counsel to represent her in a lawsuit against D. Her counsel contacted D. Conferences were held. Mr. Carey, her ex-25-year-old dance instructor, was reemployed and asked to convince P to drop her suit. Other people contacted Pat the instigation of D. These efforts were fruitful. P made what D claims was a complete settlement. D's counsel prepared a written release but refused to make a settlement. D went to P's home and persuaded P to discharge her counsel by phone and agree to settle for the refund of her March 2, 1960, payment of $6090. P's counsel received his share although there is no evidence that the settlement was ever pursuant to his advice. There is evidence that D was attempting to lead P away from her own counsel. The release signed by P is a specific release of her claim based on the March 2, 1960, payment and a general release of all claims. P dismissed the pending lawsuit and returned to the studio and participated in the activities for several months. A second release was signed for $4,000, but nothing was paid. D's manager testified that the failure to pay was a mistake and that the studio was to pay. The present action was filed March 12, 1963. It alleged fraud and misrepresentation in the several sales to P and in obtaining dismissal of the previous lawsuit and the releases signed by P. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $14,300 actual damages and $40,000 punitive damages. D appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.