Community Magazine March 2019

You Judge! Be the It’s Not All Ros s Ralph’s eldest son was engaged to be married in only one month’s time. As per his agreement with the bride’s family, Ralph was responsible to order the necessary flowers for the night of the wedding. With the intent of keeping the cost of flowers to a reasonable sum, Ralph contracted a flower distributor instead of a florist to do the wedding. He chose the arrangements and submitted his credit card number to the distributor, to be charged the day the flowers are delivered to the wedding hall. Two weeks later, the bride’s family inquired about who was doing the flowers, and upon hearing Ralph’s response they were appalled. They complained to Ralph that a distributor is not equipped to dress a canopy with flowers, nor is he experienced to drape an aisle with flowers as is customarily practiced. Ralph called back the distributor by phone and attempted to upgrade the style and design of the ceremony flowers. The distributor replied that he can do a basic canopy flower design but not anything too extravagant. At that point Ralph realized that he made a mistake by working with a distributor and not a florist, and claims to have cancelled the entire order in that phone call conversation. On the morning of the wedding the distributor sent a text to Ralph that the flowers were ready for delivery, and requested the contact person’s name at the wedding hall. Ralph replied by text that he already cancelled the order and he then immediately authorized his credit card to stop payment on all charges. Within three days of the wedding the flower distributor seeking payment claimed in Bet Din that Ralph merely cancelled the idea of upgrading the ceremony flowers in that earlier telephone conversation, but he did not cancel his original order. Ralph counterclaimed that he explicitly said to cancel the entire order. Is Ralph obligated to pay the distributor or not? How should the Bet Din rule and why? YOU BE THE JUDGE and send your response to YouJudge@CommunityM.com Verdicts – and the accompanying rationale – will be reviewed by the Rosh Bet Din. The first three correct submissions received before the deadline will win a $50 gift certificate to a Community Magazine advertiser! Correct entries will receive honorable mention in the next issue when the Rosh Bet Din’s verdict is printed. Adar I - Adar II 5779 march 2019 47