Case Scenario of Remedial Assignment - CIMT COLLEGE

Assignment Task

case scenario

Ethel Pimley wished to purchase a diamond engagement ring for her fiancée. Her uncle’s neighbour gave her the name of a jeweller. She first spoke with the jeweller, Sophie Notol, on February 18, 2023. Subsequently, she met with Sophie and discussed the type of ring and price range. Sophie showed Ethel a diamond, which she considered to be perfect. Ethel had no expertise regarding diamonds and no experience as to how to determine the value of the stone. Based upon her discussion with Sophie, Ethel understood that the value was determined by the karat size, clarity, cut, and quality. Ethel agreed to purchase the diamond. The total price of the diamond and the ring, in which it was set, was $13,620.

On April 7, 2023, Ethel attended at Sophie’s location to pick up the diamond ring. She was presented with an appraisal from Stone’s R Us, dated April 2, 2023, that appraised the retail replacement value at $22,980. The clarity of the diamond was described as SI-1. According to a diamond clarity chart, an SI-1 clarity stands for “slightly included”, which means that inclusions are noticeable to a skilled grader using 10 times magnification. The subject of insurance was discussed between Sophie and Ethel, but Sophie told Ethel that she did not need it for the ring because diamonds are forever.

On June 14, 2023, Ethel met with her fiancée, Chimmee Zin, in Croatia. During the period from April 7, 2023, until her departure for Croatia, Ethel stored the diamond ring in her bedroom behind some books. On June 18, 2023, Ethel proposed to Chimmee and presented her with the diamond. Due to the importance of this event, Ethel photographed the ring. The photographs depict the diamond as being in excellent condition. Ethel and Chimmee spent approximately four weeks in Croatia, after which they returned home.

By August 3, 2023, Chimmee noticed that the diamond displayed a black spot. Approximately 30 minutes later, she observed the black spot turn into a dark line. Chimmee did not do anything to damage the diamond. She protected it carefully and noted that underneath the diamond setting, the ring dug into her finger. Subsequent to the formation of the dark line, Chimmee put the ring in a box and did not wear it

On August 3, 2023, Ethel sent a text message to Sophie, who responded immediately and requested that Ethel call her on her cell phone, which Ethel did. Sophie requested that Ethel send a photo depicting the damage to the diamond. Sophie told her not to worry and encouraged her to insure the diamond. Sophie also advised Ethel to take the ring to a gemologist to obtain an appraisal, which could be used to obtain the insurance coverage. Sophie’s advice to appraise the ring and to obtain insurance is confirmed by text messages sent by her to Ethel.

Ethel and Sophie exchanged a series of text messages wherein they discussed insuring the ring and what options Sophie could offer to fix it, and Ethel expressed her disappointment with the situation; Sophie assured Ethel that they would figure it out. Subsequent to the exchange of the text messages, Ethel took the ring to two independent jewellers.

One of the jewellers has been in business for 30 years. He was qualified as a jeweller, having expertise with designing and making engagement rings. He does not have experience as a gemologist. The jeweller prepared an opinion letter, wherein he noted that Ethel came to him for a consultation and a second opinion with respect to the Stone’s R Us appraisal. He noticed that the specification of the diamond on the appraisal did not match the diamond mounted in the ring. He noted a small crack along the girdle diameter that made the diamond cloudy. He sent the ring for a second appraisal to Diamond Guys, where a gemologist determined the replacement value of the ring at $8,440. The gemologist determined that the gauging, weight, and colour were the same, but the clarity and cut were different

The jeweller concluded that the diamond was neither removed nor replaced with another stone, as the prongs holding the diamond did not show any stress cracks or damage, and that the stone was already damaged inside. He did not agree that the ring contained a quality diamond with no defect. He concluded that one would not get this type of clarity degradation from normal wear and tear.

Sophie has been a jewellery designer for more than 30 years. She designs rings and sells diamonds. She obtained a certificate from Brilliant Gems, dated December 12, 2022, that described the diamond as a Round Brilliant Cut diamond with a clarity of SI-1. An email from Brilliant Gems was obtained by Sophie to confirm that a diamond can crack if it is hit hard enough. She could not say how hard one must hit a diamond to cause a crack or fracture. Sophie operates a business from her home and does not maintain business insurance. She had never encountered a diamond with a similar problem.

Using the above fact scenario, draft the following documents for a matter at the Small Claims Court:

1. General Title Page: This title page is for the entire remedial assignment;

2. Plaintiff’s Claim: As the paralegal for the Plaintiff, draft a Plaintiff’s Claim, comprised of the Small Claims Court form, an attached Schedule A, and 2 pieces of evidence (Create an appraisal, a receipt, a photo, etc.), pursuant to the Rules of the Small Claims Court. Schedule A should be between 10 and 20 paragraphs in length and contain a proper prayer for relief;

3. Defence: As the paralegal for the Defendant, draft a hypothetical Defence, comprised of the Small Claims Court form, a Schedule A, and between 1 and 2 pieces of evidence (a receipt, a photo, an email, etc.), pursuant to the Rules of the Small Claims Court. Schedule A should be between 10 and 20 paragraphs in length;

4. Opening Statements for the Plaintiff and the Defendant: 1) As the paralegal for the Plaintiff, draft an opening statement; 2) as the paralegal for the Defendant, draft an opening statement from the opposing point of view. Each statement will identify the theme of the case, the parties, the legal issues, a summary of the facts, and the relief sought;

5. Direct Examination of the Plaintiff: As the paralegal for the Plaintiff, draft 30 direct examination questions to ask the Plaintiff. All questions must be non-leading. Further, you must tender your 2 exhibits in the proper format within the 30 questions;

6. Cross-examination of the Plaintiff: As the paralegal for the Defendant, draft 30 crossexamination questions to ask the Plaintiff. All questions must be leading;

7. Closing Arguments for the Plaintiff: As the paralegal for the Plaintiff, draft a closing argument. The argument must argue the proven facts, state the legal issues, state the relief sought and costs, and use the legal authorities quoted in your book of authorities;

8. Evidence Book of the Plaintiff: Compile an Evidence Book for the Plaintiff, pursuant to previously used templates, containing a title page, index, and tabs. Limit the evidence to 2 documents of your choice;

9. Book of Authorities of the Plaintiff: Compile a Book of Authorities, pursuant to previously used templates, containing a title page, index, and tabs. Limit the authorities to a combination of any 2 pieces of legislation and/or case law.

This Law has been solved by our PHD Experts at My Uni Paper.