Nancy a Krupp v. Lighthouse Full Life Center Church
332659
| Mich. Ct. App. | May 9, 2017Background
- Marvin Sapp (gospel singer/preacher) and his agent Shilantha Jones routinely used Antor Travel (plaintiff) to arrange his business air travel; sometimes third-party promoters funded the tickets.
- Black Sunshine Media Events (promoter) contracted with Sapp to perform in South Africa and Black Sunshine provided a credit card authorization to pay for approved tickets that Antor purchased.
- Antor coordinated with Jones, booked the flights (using Black Sunshine’s card number), and informed Jones; tickets were issued and used, but the credit card authorization later failed and Delta charged Antor.
- Antor sued Sapp, Lighthouse Full Life Center Church, and Praise Place Ministries for breach of contract (express and implied) and unjust enrichment; amended complaint included breach claims against Sapp.
- Trial court granted partial summary disposition for Antor on breach of contract against Sapp and entered judgment for $26,234.52; other defendants’ claims were dismissed without prejudice. Sapp appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an express or implied contract existed between Antor and Sapp for the ticket purchase | Antor contends Jones requested travel and approved specific flights, constituting an offer by Antor and acceptance by Sapp (through Jones); prior course of dealing shows a contractual process | Sapp argues no offer/acceptance occurred, no price was communicated, and third-party payment means no contract with Antor | Court held a contract existed: objective manifest of offer/acceptance via communications and course of dealing established mutual assent and consideration |
| Whether lack of direct payment by Sapp (third-party payer) defeats consideration | Antor argues that a bargained-for exchange existed because it provided tickets and received authorization/arrangement to be paid; third-party payment does not negate consideration | Sapp argues payment via promoter meant he never contracted to pay Antor and thus no consideration | Court held consideration present: providing services with expectation of payment suffices even if payment was to come from a third party |
| Whether Antor failed to mitigate damages after the debit memo from Delta | Antor says it pursued mitigation by contacting Black Sunshine, Delta, and others to secure payment | Sapp argues Antor did not take reasonable steps (e.g., did not contact the card issuer directly) and thus failed to mitigate | Court held Antor made reasonable mitigation efforts (burden on defendant to prove failure), so mitigation defense fails |
| Whether unjust enrichment claim survives when an express contract exists | Antor asserted implied contract/alternative unjust enrichment against Sapp | Sapp relied on contract defenses and argued alternative remedies | Court held unjust enrichment not available where a contract governs the subject matter; claim is moot because contract existed |
Key Cases Cited
- Kloian v. Domino’s Pizza LLC, 273 Mich. App. 449 (contract-formation treated as question of law)
- Innovation Ventures, LLC v. Liquid Mfg., 499 Mich. 491 (consideration as bargained-for exchange)
- Morris v. Clawson Tank Co., 459 Mich. 256 (defendant bears burden to prove plaintiff failed to mitigate damages)
- Patrick v. U.S. Tangible Inv. Corp., 234 Mich. App. 541 (course of dealing and circumstances inform contract formation)
- Featherston v. Steinhoff, 226 Mich. App. 584 (contracts may be implied from conduct and circumstances)