Quote:
Originally Posted by YorkieRose  Check the law...they have NO contract. It is her word against her word. The judge will NOT force the breeder to give the female to her..the most she can hope for is the price...and she has to prove she can get exactly what the price is...if she says the pup would sell for $2000, then she must provide the court with proof..a buyer willing to pay, ads in the local papers, etc...pups of the same sex an quality she has sold in the past. Saying a dog is top dollar quality has to be proven..take the pedigree and pictures.
People get all up in arms and say sue...I would refuse to give the AKC papers, if that did not convience the breeder, then I would accept the male and sell for $1500 or whatever the going rate in her area...if she does not want to be bothered selling the male, then take the $700...
I do not care what they talked about and neither will the court..it is what the law states and there is no contract...and thebreeder may well lie or remember it differently.....saying she agreed to return A PUPPY, but did not say male or female...or she can say they had no agreement and left it to decide when the litter was born..people lie all the time..and if she will cheat her out of the female, then she will lie to a judge..the judge is not a mind reader and no contract means her word against her word...
Perhaps, the breeder will not want a court suit and give in..call her bluff..but once you piss her off she may not get the male or the stud fee...I , always believe the good guy wins in the end...
This has happened to me a few times..once the female owed to me died at 12months..person stepped on her on the stairs..she begged me for a stud service so she could try for the same puppy again to replace her..told me to name my stud fee...my fee was, sorry, my male is not available. |
They do have a contract. Contract law states that a verbal contract is enforcebable. it does not have to be in writing. Any time two people agree on something, and it is legal, and both parties are recieving something then it is enforceable.
A wise judge would ask a few questions and determine who was telling the truth. For instance. They might ask, what did you agree to give in exchange for the stud service? If it was money then why wasn't it paid up front?
Just those two questions would tell the judge that she was lying. Because, as Judge Judy says, if it doesn't make sense then it is probably not true. So it doen't make sense that if the agreement was for money, that it would not have been paid up front. Plus she has witnesses.
I don't like to hear the word sue either, but taking a person to court to enforce a contract, is not sueing.