Alright, it’s a tricky situation, legally speaking. There are very few states which will enforce strictly verbal (non written) agreements and those under limited circumstances. Transfers of real property (land, etc.) are almost universally exempt from a verbal contract, and penalties over $500 are almost automatically rejected in cases where the contract is only based on verbal agreements.
However, the weight of a verbal agreement is vastly increased when there is supporting evidence (such as videotape). When Himself said, “We will say, ‘I will give you a million dollars for your favorite charity, paid for by Trump, if you take the test and it shows you’re an Indian,” he entered into a verbal agreement, supported by videotaped evidence, that he would pay the sum of one million dollars ($1,000,000) to an entity of Sen. Warren’s choice, upon the completion of certain acts, leading to certain, specifically named, results.
Sen. Warren has fulfilled her part of this agreement. All specified elements of fulfillment on her part have been completed. What’s more, she has, relying on his verbal specifications, spent her own funds to assure fulfillment on her part of the contract.
Under the doctrine of detrimental reliance, as laid out in Breaux v. Schlumberger, Sen. Warren has a legitimate claim under the law to, at the absolute minimum, the costs she has incurred in procuring results of the test of her genome.
While it can be argued that Mr. Trump is not liable to pay Sen. Warren more than $500 in direct damages due to his breach of contract, he is undeniably liable for the costs she incurred in procuring the DNA results she produced today, both the costs for testing and postage, handling, etc.
I have little doubt Sen. Warren could easily recoup direct damages of $500 plus incendiary costs and legal fees should she wish to pursue the case in court.
And, damn, wouldn’t it be delicious to see her depose the son of a bitch?
This is a Creative Commons article. The original version of this article appeared here.