Labagnara v. Kane Furniture Co‪.‬

QUA, Justice. This is a bill in equity. The case is here on the plaintiff's appeals from an interlocutory decree sustaining the defendant's demurrer and a final decree dismissing the bill. The demurrer is based solely on the ground that the plaintiff has a plain, adequate and complete remedy at law. The allegations of the bill may be summarized as follows: About April 7, 1932, the plaintiff and his wife purchased of the defendant 'from sample' a bed room set for the total sum of $326.10. The plaintiff paid a deposit of $30 and signed a paper 'which he understood was a lease' but he did not receive a copy of the paper at the time and has never been given one, though he was given a receipt book which stated that it was issued in connection with 'Lease No. 38817.' On May 13, 1932, additional merchandise to the amount of $22.50 was added to the account. The merchandise purchased April 7 was delivered before May 1. A few days after delivery the plaintiff complained at the defendant's office that the bed room set was not as good as the one he had been shown at the defendant's showrooms and requested that the defendant take it back and deliver the kind of set he had purchased. He was told that this set was exactly like the one shown him, and he said nothing further at that time. Some time later the plaintiff discovered that the furniture delivered to him was not new but had been superficially refinished to look like new. Since that time he has repeatedly complained at the defendant's office and he has received promises that the trouble would be rectified, but very little has been done beyond sending service men to look at the furniture, except that the defendant has replaced a chest of drawers by another, which proved to be in even worse condition than the first one. The plaintiff has made payments on account from time to time to the amount of $137.60, 'mostly under protest or compulsion.' On or about April 25, 1934, more than two years after the original purchase, the plaintiff received from the defendant written notices of the defendant's intention to foreclose the 'lease' and to take the property. On June 11, 1934, the defendant 'extorted' $5 from the plaintiff under threat of immediately removing the furniture. The plaintiff and his wife are young, inexperienced and ignorant of their legal rights and therefore failed to protect themselves properly, and the defendant took advantage of their ignorance and inexperience for the purpose of deceiving and defrauding them.