• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

The case of who ows the clothes?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

joshr799

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New Jersey

I recently left a company I was with for approx 7 years. 4 months ago I was promoted and an entire custom wardrobe was purchased for me. 10 slacks all different colors and patterns tailored to fit my waist and length, 10 shirts again all different colors and patterns and 2 blazers. I was told that I needed to purchase the ties, shoes and other accessories. I was under the impression that these items were a gift and would not need to be returned. I recently received a letter stating that I must return this property. There is nothing in writing as this is a small business. I have the receipt for the accessories and the business has the receipt for the shirts and slacks, other than that there are no other facts other than he said she said.

Any advice would be appreciated, thanks in advance.
 


Law Ninja

Member
Q: I was under the impression that these items were a gift and would not need to be returned. I recently received a letter stating that I must return this property.

A: Your impression does not matter. The clothes are only a gift if your employer intended them to be a gift. Thus, you must prove his intent if you are sued over the clothes or he will destroy you in court.
 

ecmst12

Senior Member
I doubt that. If the employer sues, then the burden will be on HIM to prove that there was an agreement to repay.
 

Law Ninja

Member
I doubt that. If the employer sues, then the burden will be on HIM to prove that there was an agreement to repay.
That is incorrect!

A gift does not exist unless 3 essential elements are met: intent, delivery, and acceptance. The burden is on the donee to prove the existence of all 3 elements.

Here, there is clearly delivery and acceptance, but the OP still needs to prove intent!

HIIIIIIIIIII-YA!
 

ecmst12

Senior Member
Last I checked, the burden of proof in a lawsuit is on the plaintiff. Even if "gifting" is an affirmative defense, the plaintiff will have to present SOME evidence that they intended it as a loan or contingent on continued employment.
 

Law Ninja

Member
Last I checked, the burden of proof in a lawsuit is on the plaintiff. Even if "gifting" is an affirmative defense, the plaintiff will have to present SOME evidence that they intended it as a loan or contingent on continued employment.
Check again, young student. The employer will have to prove that he provided the clothing. A loan will be presumed unless disproven by the OP.

Now, back to the temple for your daily lessons!
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
Suppose you provide a link to the law that puts the burden of proof on the poster, since you're so convinced of that.
 

cbg

I'm a Northern Girl
In other words, you aren't prepared to put your money where your mouth is?

Make no mistake - I am not asking you for guidance. I am challenging you to prove what I believe to be an incorrect answer.

And unless you provide back up to your position, I will continue to believe that you are wrong and I will so inform the poster.

YOU are the one making the statement. YOU justify it. I'm not going to do your work for you.
 

Law Ninja

Member
In other words, you aren't prepared to put your money where your mouth is?

Make no mistake - I am not asking you for guidance. I am challenging you to prove what I believe to be an incorrect answer.

And unless you provide back up to your position, I will continue to believe that you are wrong and I will so inform the poster.

YOU are the one making the statement. YOU justify it. I'm not going to do your work for you.
I have provided joshr799 with the correct answer, and he may use that knowledge or ignore it as he sees fit. My work here is done.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pattytx

Senior Member
If lawninja cannot provide the legal justification for his stance, OP, you should take it with a grain of sodium chloride.

There is a disagreement here. LawNinja cannot show any proof of his claim. It's not the "correct" answer just because he says it is.
 

itdepends

Member
It looks like lawninja is right. Family Estate Disbutes

Interestingly, the burden of proving an inter vivos gift shifts to the party that asserts the claim. The New Jersey Supreme Court has declared that the donee must show by explicit and convincing evidence that the donor intended to make a present gift and unmistakably intended to relinquish permanently the ownership of the subject gift.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top