Rae & Wong, Beyond Integrity, 3rd Ed. (Zondervan) 2012, ISBN: 9780310291107 This
ID: 405997 • Letter: R
Question
Rae & Wong, Beyond Integrity, 3rd Ed. (Zondervan) 2012, ISBN: 9780310291107
This is a case: This is about a court appeal by Audrey E. Vokes, from a dismissal her lawsuit against the Arthur Murray Dance Studios and Mr. J.P. Davenport, an Arthur Murray Dance Studio franchisee. Vokes, a widow of 51 years and without family, had a yen to be ‘an accomplished dancer’ with the hopes of finding ‘new interest in life’. So, on February 10, 1961, a dubious fate, with the assist of a motivated acquaintance, procured her to attend a ‘dance party’ at Davenport's ‘School of Dancing’ where she whiled away the pleasant hours, sometimes in a private room, absorbing his accomplished sales technique, during which her grace and poise were elaborated upon and her rosy future as ‘an excellent dancer’ was painted for her in vivid and glowing colors. As an incident to this interlude, he sold her eight 1/2-hour dance lessons to be utilized within one calendar month therefrom, for the sum of $14.50 cash in hand paid, obviously a baited ‘come-on’. Thus she embarked upon an almost endless pursuit of the terpsichorean art during which, over a period of less than sixteen months, she was sold fourteen ‘dance courses' totaling in the aggregate 2302 hours of dancing lessons for a total cash outlay of $31,090.45, all at Davenport's dance emporium. All of these fourteen courses were evidenced by execution of a written ‘Enrollment Agreement—Arthur Murray's School of Dancing’ with the addendum in heavy black print, ‘No one will be informed that you are taking dancing lessons. Your relations with us are held in strict confidence’, setting forth the number of ‘dancing lessons' and the ‘lessons in rhythm sessions' currently sold to her from time to time, and always of course accompanied by payment of cash of the realm. These dance lesson contracts and the price of over $31,000 were procured from her by means and methods of Davenport and his associates which went beyond the unsavory, yet legally permissible, perimeter of ‘sales puffing’ and intruded well into the forbidden area of undue influence, the suggestion of falsehood, the suppression of truth, and the free exercise of rational judgment. From the time of her first contact with the dancing school in February, 1961, she was influenced unwittingly by a constant and continuous barrage of flattery, false praise, excessive compliments, and panegyric encomiums. She was incessantly subjected to overreaching blandishment and cajolery. She was assured she had ‘grace and poise’; that she was ‘rapidly improving and developing in her dancing skill’; that the additional lessons would ‘make her a beautiful dancer, capable of dancing with the most accomplished dancers'; that she was ‘rapidly progressing in the development of her dancing skill and gracefulness', etc., etc. She was given ‘dance aptitude tests' for the ostensible purpose of ‘determining’ the number of remaining hours of instruction needed by her from time to time. At one point she was sold 545 additional hours of dancing lessons to be entitled to award of the ‘Bronze Medal’ signifying that she had reached ‘the Bronze Standard’, a supposed designation of dance achievement by students of Arthur Murray, Inc. Later she was sold an additional 926 hours in order to gain the ‘Silver Medal’, indicating she had reached ‘the Silver Standard’, at a cost of $12,501.35. At one point, while she still had to her credit about 900 unused hours of instructions, she was induced to purchase an additional 24 hours of lessons to participate in a trip to Miami at her own expense, where she would be ‘given the opportunity to dance with members of the Miami Studio’. She was induced at another point to purchase an additional 123 hours of lessons in order to be not only eligible for the Miami trip but also to become ‘a life member of the Arthur Murray Studio’, carrying with it certain dubious emoluments, at a further cost of $1,752.30. At another point, while she still had over 1,000 unused hours of instruction she was induced to buy 151 additional hours at a cost of $2,049.00 to be eligible for a ‘Student Trip to Trinidad’, at her own expense as she later learned. Also, when she still had 1100 unused hours to her credit, she was prevailed upon to purchase an additional 347 hours at a cost of $4,235.74, to qualify her to receive a ‘Gold Medal’ for achievement, indicating she had advanced to ‘the Gold Standard’. On another occasion, while she still had over 1200 unused hours, she was induced to buy an additional 175 hours of instruction at a cost of $2,472.75 to be eligible ‘to take a trip to Mexico’. Finally, sandwiched in between other lesser sales promotions, she was influenced to buy an additional 481 hours of instruction at a cost of $6,523.81 in order to ‘be classifies as a Gold Bar Member, the ultimate achievement of the dancing studio’. All the foregoing sales promotions, illustrative of the entire fourteen separate contracts, were procured by Davenport and Arthur Murray, Inc., by false representations to her that she was improving in her dancing ability, that she had excellent potential, that she was responding to instructions in dancing grace, and that they were developing her into a beautiful dancer, whereas in truth and in fact she did not develop in her dancing ability, she had no ‘dance aptitude’, and in fact had difficulty in ‘hearing that musical beat’. The representations to her ‘were in fact false and known by the Davenport to be false and contrary to the Vokes’s true ability, the truth of her ability being fully known to Davenport, but withheld from her for the sole and specific intent to deceive and defraud Vokes and to induce her in the purchasing of additional hours of dance lessons'. The lessons were sold to her ‘in total disregard to her true physical, rhythm, and mental ability. In other words, while she first exulted that she was entering the ‘spring of her life’, she finally was awakened to the fact there was ‘spring’ neither in her life nor in her feet. The foregoing is the actual, somewhat lyrical, language of the appellate judge in the court opinion on Ms. Vokes’s case. Given that she apparently had the time and money to buy the dance lessons and she had no heirs who were deprived of their inheritance, how do you respond to the marketing efforts focused on her? Was Davenport’s salesmanship unethical?
Explanation / Answer
Yes Davenport's saleman was completely unethical. The saleman had a clear knowledge of the wealth and situation of the Mrs Vokes, so he manupulated and gave false representation of the dance classes and Mrs Vokes involvement in it. The sales man has falsely flattered her just to sell.
Also we know that "A statement of a party having superior knowledge may be regarded as a statement of fact although it would be considered as opinion if the parties were dealing on equal terms."
In this case the salesman had a superior knoweldge as to whether Mrs Vokes had 'dance potential' and as to whether she was noticeably improving in the art of terpsichore. And it would be a reasonable inference that the flowery praise of her by defendants were made to convince her to buy lessons.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.