Jafari v. Wally Findlay Galleries

Jafari (plaintiff) negotiated with DiLorenzo (defendant) to buy a Dali painting, and the parties wrote down agreed purchase terms, including a $210,000 price, but the memorandum didn't specify a payment or delivery date, though both knew DiLorenzo had his own deadline to sell the painting on the owner's behalf. Jafari kept demanding the painting's original certificate of authenticity even after an expert confirmed authenticity, while DiLorenzo was willing to accept a certified check or deposit and got extensions from the painting's owner. DiLorenzo eventually sold the painting to a third party, and Jafari later bought a different copy at auction for more money. Jafari sued for breach of contract; DiLorenzo moved for summary judgment, arguing no contract existed or, alternatively, that Jafari breached first by failing to pay within a reasonable time.