Judge Andrew Tarantino Jr.
Callahan sued Coventry, his ex-brother-in-law, for repayment of a $20,000 loan. Coventry claimed the money was a gift, but subsequently admitted it was a loan, to pay family expenses while he was having financial problems. Callahan’s wife, Coventry’s wife’s sister, testified that a check was given and endorsed to Kelly Coventry, and deposited into the couple’s joint bank account becoming marital property. Coventry’s counsel objected to Kelly testifying based on spousal privilege and the court sustained the objection. The court noted while the absence of a of writing as to the terms of the parties’ agreement may have precluded Callahan from enforcement of the purported agreement, Coventry admitted the money was loaned to his family, and Callahan was not barred by the Statute of Frauds. Yet, it noted Callahan loaned the money to Kelly, not Coventry, but now sought repayment from Coventry after the parties divorced, without adding Kelly, as a necessary party. The court stated it could not find either an agreement, nor a meeting of the minds, thus could not find that Coventry failed to perform any agreement. It ruled all the elements required to establish a breach of contract were not established, hence, it could not hold that one occurred, granting dismissal.