LawyersUSA

The jilted bride, RoseMary Shell, gave up an $81,000-per-year job in Pensacola, Fla. in October 2006 after the defendant, Wayne Gibbs, proposed to her and she decided to move to Gainesville, Ga., to be with him.

But less than two months later, Gibbs left a note in the bathroom informing Shell that he had decided not to go through with it – at least not for a while.

Their relationship continued for another five months, until Shell found Gibbs with another woman. She responded by filing suit against Gibbs for breaching an oral contract, which caused her financial and emotional harm.

Shell's lawyer, Lydia J. Sartain, confirmed that breach-of-contract cases involving promises of marriage are rare. But she said she was familiar with the cause of action because one of her partners at Stewart, Melvin & Frost in Gainesville had recently settled a similar case.

Sartain had also handled a high-profile case involving marital trepidation three years ago when she represented "runaway bride" Jennifer Wilbanks, who made national headlines after faking her abduction just before her wedding day. Wilbanks faced criminal charges of making false statements to the police and pleaded no contest in return for a sentence of probation, community service and a fine.

Debt and unkept promises

In the Shell case, the couple – both currently in their 50s with grown adult children from previous marriages – had been in a relationship for several years, according to Sartain.

She said this was the second time Gibbs had balked at marrying her client, who originally moved to Florida after Gibbs balked at marriage the first time.

But in October 2006, Gibbs sought to renew their relationship, offering Shell a diamond ring and asking her to move back to Georgia and marry him, according to Sartain. She said her client told Gibbs about $40,000 in debt that she had accumulated and that Gibbs had told her that he would pay it for her. They agreed to get married in December, and Shell moved in with him.

"She'd been living in the house for only two weeks and he leaves a note in the bathroom for her, breaking it off," Sartain said. "In the note he says he's sick, has high blood pressure and depression problems and that once he's cured of all those things he'd want to get married. He said he was sorry about making all these promises he couldn't keep."

The couple stayed together for several months – Sartain said Shell wanted to nurse Gibbs back to better health and, she hoped, marry him. Then, in April, she found him with another woman.

Shell came to Sartain, an acquaintance from childhood, to talk about legal action.

Sartain said the first step was to send Gibbs a letter asking for $250,000. When he failed to reply, they filed suit in Hall County Superior Court.

According to Sartain, Gibbs' defense was that Shell had lied to him about the extent of her debt. Sartain said that Shell's total debt was about $50,000, or slightly more than she'd told Gibbs initially.

"He said that when he asked her what her debt was, she lowballed it and he agreed to marry her based on the lower number," she said. "First, he said he'd paid $30,000 or $35,000 [on her debt] and he just didn't have any more money."

Sartain said his claim of financial exhaustion prompted her to ask the judge for a hearing on Gibbs' financial information. The judge approved the motion and Sartain was able to show that Gibbs had made an inaccurate financial statement.

She also discovered that Shell wasn't the only woman getting money from Gibbs. The woman Shell found him with in April had received a $500 check from Gibbs the previous year, shortly before he proposed to Shell.

"We believe that he raised the issue of credit card debt after the fact as a smokescreen to try to blame it on RoseMary when really, as it turned out, we don't think he ever intended to follow through on the wedding," said Sartain.

Difficult jury selection

According to Sartain, the facts in the case were not really in dispute – the defendant essentially admitted them. But she knew it would be a challenge to convince a jury that her client deserved compensation for a disappointing turn in a romantic relationship.

"Jury selection was very difficult for us," she said. "I asked [prospective jurors] their thoughts about [it]: if you're engaged to somebody and the wedding falls through – is there anything you could – or should – do about it?

"On first blush, most folks said no; that's what happens; it's part of life. So I tried to eliminate those people who, by the way, were mostly women."

But at the end of jury selection both Sartain and Shell were discouraged. Two jurors on the panel had stated they thought the case was "silly."

But over the course of the 1 1/2-day trial, they apparently changed their minds.

"I just think my client had a compelling story," said Sartain. "It was a breach because she moved away and gave up that great job based on her reliance on his promise to her."

Sartain said she believed that Gibbs and his counsel "never really took the case seriously."

The defense called no experts and Sartain called one, an expert in human resources administration who testified about the value of the package that Shell had given up in Pensacola.

Besides her client's own story, Sartain believes that Gibbs "just didn't make a very good witness. I think we impeached him a time or two. I think he was not completely honest."

Sartain told the jury the rest of the story: After Shell found Gibbs with another woman, it took her another year to find employment, finally settling for a $31,000 job at a state college. While cross examining Gibbs, Sartain said she established that he was well connected in the construction industry but did nothing to help Shell find a job.

She was also able to shed doubt on his assertion that the other woman was someone he knew years earlier and contacted only after he broke things off with Shell. Sartain did this by pointing out the $500 check that he'd given the woman just before his marriage proposal to Shell in 2006.

"Basically," she said, "my closing argument was: He's a cad."

The jury of six men and six women deliberated for three hours.

"They told me they immediately agreed there had been a breach of contract," said Sartain. "So then it was a matter of what damages, if any, to award her."

The plaintiff's expert had placed the true value of Shell's package in Pensacola at around $130,000 and Sartain said that was the figure the jurors used to make their determination. They decided to give her "a little extra" and not to award attorney fees.

She said she's heard that defense counsel will appeal.

Lawyers USA contacted Gibbs' lawyer, Hammond Law, for confirmation and comment, but he did not respond.

Plaintiff's attorney: Lydia J. Sartain of Stewart, Melvin & Frost in Gainesville, Ga.

Defense attorney: G. Hammond Law III of Whitmer & Law in Gainesville, Ga.

The case: Shell v. Gibbs, July 23, 2008; Hall County Superior Court, Gainesville, Ga., Judge Kathlene Gosselin.

Questions or comments can be directed to the writer at: dick.dahl@lawyersusaonline.com