Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Tillett v. Elefante

April 28, 2010

RANDY TILLETT, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
KATHLEEN ELEFANTE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.



On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Bergen County, L-4660-07.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted April 12, 2010

Before Judges Reisner and Chambers.

Defendant Kathleen Elefante appeals from a jury verdict of $11,535 in favor of plaintiff Randy Tillett and from the trial court's order of November 21, 2008 denying her motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and a new trial. We affirm.

I.

The parties had a dating relationship between May 2003 and December of 2006. Plaintiff testified that at various times during their relationship, defendant asked him to lend her money, which she promised to repay. He testified that at her request, he lent plaintiff $2261 to lease a car, deposited $3000 into her checking account to pay her mortgage, lent her another $1500 to pay bills, and lent her additional sums for home repairs. He also spent about $2000 to buy computers for her children. He testified that from time to time defendant would ask him how much she owed him and would "periodically tell me I swear to you I will pay you back every penny."

According to plaintiff, defendant told him that she intended to sell her house when her youngest daughter graduated from high school. In that context, she told plaintiff that "I'm selling the house, and when I sell the house I will pay you back your money." At that time, trusting defendant, plaintiff was willing to wait "figuring that in a couple of years I'll get my money back." He testified that during the relationship in 2004, defendant repaid him $1000 of her debt but she made no other payments.

According to plaintiff, at some point in 2005, he told defendant that he was beginning to have financial problems, and he asked her to take out a home equity loan to help pay his debts. He testified that he even offered to make the payments on the loan until she sold the house, but she declined. He testified that toward the end of the relationship in November or December 2006, they went out to a coffee shop and had a conversation about their relationship and about the debt. During that conversation, defendant stated that "I know I owe you money, and I'm going to pay you back, but there is no court in the State of New Jersey that can prove I owe you anything." According to plaintiff, there had been no conversation about a possible lawsuit before defendant made that statement. At that point, plaintiff concluded that he had been "taken" and that defendant had no intention of actually repaying the debt. Shortly after that conversation, defendant ended their relationship and plaintiff thereafter filed this lawsuit.

Defendant did not deny that plaintiff paid significant sums of money on her behalf, to repair her house and for other purposes. In fact she admitted the payments at her deposition, portions of which were read to the jury. However, she claimed that those expenditures were all gifts. In her deposition, she asserted that during the relationship, defendant never characterized the payments as loans and never asked her for repayment. She admitted giving plaintiff $1000, but contended it was not the repayment of a loan but rather was partial payment for her share of a vacation they took together. According to defendant's deposition testimony, the first intimation she had that plaintiff was going to demand repayment of any money he had given her was when she was served with the complaint. She admitted telling plaintiff, at an earlier time, that she would pay him $15,000 when she sold her house. However, she contended that was a spontaneous offer "[b]ecause I knew that he still paid all of this money."

In her direct trial testimony, defendant alleged that in October 2006, plaintiff asked her take out a $50,000 home equity line of credit on her house in order to pay both of their credit card bills. According to defendant, at some point in November 2006, when she told him that she had decided not to take out the equity loan, defendant "seemed mad" and said he couldn't believe that I wasn't going to do that after everything that he did, and then he said that he could sue me. . . .

That's when I said no court's going to say I owe you anything.

During cross-examination, defendant also testified that in the same November conversation in which she refused to take out the home equity loan, she told plaintiff that she would give him $15,000 when she sold her house. She did not assert that she made the statement after he threatened to sue her. Several pages later in the transcript, however, she asserted that she made the offer to pay the $15,000 in a different conversation a month later.

Defendant did not testify that she made the $15,000 offer in an attempt to settle a claim defendant was asserting. In fact she denied that plaintiff had ever asked her to "pay back some of the money that [she] owed to him." Instead she contended that she made the offer as she was breaking up with plaintiff, because she "was feeling bad" and "knew he'd spent a lot of money." She also testified that plaintiff refused her offer because he said "I owed him more money than that and he didn't want to wait until I sold my house." However, she insisted that defendant never actually asserted that ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.