Legal Question in Business Law in California

While the claim is not barred by the statute of limitations, you might be able to argue that they are estopped from raising it as they wanted so long that you can no longer obtain evidence in your favor [witnesses do not remember that far back, can not reconstruct records of consumption, etc.]. Your exposure is the value of the two bottles of wine they claim they did not consume. You could offer them a discount on their next company meal at your restaurant [since they probably will never come back to you no matter what], after pointing out you are sure they did consume the wine, it is ;unfair they waited a couple of months; they might not be able to sue in Small Claims Court as the correct plaintiff is unclear; in Superior court the filing fees are more than the wine is worth [$355 to file], they will loss more money in billable time then they can win, do they really want to testify under oath as to whether they were sober enough to remember how many bottles of wine were consumed and why did they wait so long to make a claim to you, no one likes attorneys so they will have to overcome that basis against them, etc. That they demand the wine back or they will sue and do not offer any compromise suggests that they know their case is weak and that they are trying to frighten you into settling.

The other attorney is right on point. Threatening to sue you for one bottle of wine? Give me a break! Consult with an attorney in your area for specifics.

Kevin B. Murphy, B.S., M.B.A., J.D. - Mr. Franchise

Franchise Attorney

I would call my local newspapers and TV stations.

I agree with Mr. Stone. It's this type of thing that give lawyers bad names. I would just ignore them.

That law firm must not have very much to do if they are fighting with you over a bottle of wine. I'm sure they have misplaced and lost things worth a great deal more. Either that, or it was one hell of a bottle of wine.