More details to this question:
I was recently engaged and my mother and ex and her friend went to find a wedding dress. Well of course they found one and my mother paid for the entire dress. My ex gave it to her friend to keep at her house so that I wouldn't ever see it. Well since we have split up and I asked her friend (which is a mutual friend) for the dress back so my mother could try to return it or sell it and our friends response was "Im not getting into the middle of this". I have since found out that my ex has gotten the dress back and is in possession of it. Our friend advised someone else that they called a lawyer who advised her that she only had to give the dress back to the person who handed it to her, even though our friend observed my mother pay for it and has the proof of purchase or receipt for it showing who's property it is. My question is, is there any truth to this or does the dress not belong to my mother who has documentation of ownership? If it matters we live in Tennessee bought the dress in Arkansas and our mutual friend lives in Mississippi? Thank you for your help
1 ANSWER
If your mutual friend didn't know that your mother had paid for the dress, she might plausibly be able to claim that she had no duty to your mother. But since she did know that the dress was your mother's, she also knew that your ex was not the owner of the dress, but rather was acting as an agent of your mother when he told her to hold on to the dress. Thus, the friend was only holding the dress as an agent (a bailee) of your mother. I assume that she also knew that you had broken up with your ex at the time she released the dress to him, and can't plausibly claim that she thought he was acting on your behalf or your mother's. It appears that she may have breached that agreement, may have been negligent (in releasing the dress to your ex, assuming she didn't know he was going to hold on to it) and may also have committed the tort of conversion (as has your ex, possibly along with tortious interference with the bailment contract between your mother and the friend.)
As for the various states involved, it presents a complex choice of law question. Most likely, the law of Mississipi would apply, as that is where the contract was performed and the torts took place. I am not familiar with the particular laws of these jurisdictions, but I doubt that there is a material difference in this area.
Answered on Jul 14th, 2014 at 9:03 AM