SAN DIEGO – On Dec. 13, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California weighed in on a fashion designer’s case stemming from an alleged promise she would be a millionaire after becoming part owner in a company that sells Western-style boots.
U.S. District Judge Cynthia Bashant ruled to grant in part and deny in part Old Gringo Inc., et al.'s motion for summary judgment and denied plaintiff Marsha Wright's Rule 56(d) motion requesting denial or deferral of a ruling for summary judgment pending further discovery damages.
The court first ruled that Wright didn’t properly prove a triable issue on consideration. The defendants argued they were entitled to summary judgment on all eight of Wright's causes of action because any promise that she would be 5 percent owner “was only supported by past consideration,” which isn’t enough to “support an enforceable contract term,” according to the opinion.
The court added that Wright failed to prove she was actually given ownership interest. While Wright said the pay increase she received came from the alleged agreement, the evidence still doesn’t prove Old Gringo actually offered Wright the ownership interest that was conditioned on her continued performance, the ruling states. The court granted the defendants summary judgment on the breach of contract for failure of consideration and dismissed that claim with prejudice.
The defendants' request for summary judgment on the other grounds raised in their motion was denied.
As for Wright's Rule 56(d) motion, Bashant denied it as moot.
Wright was the head designer for Old Gringo from 2008 to 2015. The opinion states she had been designing boots for the company since 2004 and was an independent contractor at all times. Wright sued Old Gringo in September 2017 after allegedly being told in January 2013 she had 5 percent ownership interest that would make her millions, but never got anything from it.
She sued over allegations of breach of contract, fraud and fraudulent misrepresentation, specific performance, promissory fraud, concealment, negligent misrepresentation, promissory estoppel and unjust enrichment.