Tony Finau is presently facing a lawsuit from former friends who assert that they contributed financially to his journey to the PGA Tour. They contend that they may be entitled to a portion of the substantial earnings he has accumulated, which exceed $43 million from his career on tour.
The essence of this disagreement revolves around a purported verbal agreement. It is claimed that both parties reached a consensus through spoken communication regarding a certain arrangement, although no written documentation exists. While oral agreements hold the same legal weight as written contracts, demonstrating that the parties engaged in discussions and mutually accepted the terms can be challenging.
In the presence of documented evidence, the situation is clearer. Generally, juries and courts require substantial proof to validate an alleged oral agreement, often necessitating some form of recording. This is the current state of the dispute.
Utah entrepreneur Molonai Hola stated that back in 2006, he invested $600,000 into Finau’s career in exchange for 20 percent of his future earnings. According to Golf Digest, Hola asserts that Finau “agreed and understood” the arrangement, but there is no formal contract to support this claim. Finau and his team have refuted the existence of such a deal.
Initially, Hola’s lawsuit was dismissed due to the time elapsed. However, a different judge in Utah decided not to dismiss it. This means there’s a possibility that Finau and Hola could face off in court regarding the issue of “unjust enrichment.”
This suggests that, in the absence of a formal handshake agreement, a party receiving investment from another should not gain an unfair advantage. The investing party should also be entitled to reap benefits from the arrangement.
However, there are clear boundaries to this principle. An individual cannot assert a right to benefits simply because they provided a gift, which is the basis of Finau’s assertion. Hola contends that the transaction was an investment rather than a gift, thereby granting him certain entitlements. While it may be challenging to establish the truth of either claim, the matter could potentially be resolved in a court trial.
Tony Finau had two lawsuits levied against him
Tony Finau’s legal troubles extend beyond his situation with Molonai Hola. In reality, he is facing two lawsuits, one of which was initiated by Hola. Additionally, David Hunter has filed a lawsuit against Finau for breaching a contract that the Finau family entered into back in 2007.
The judge wrote in his decision to throw out the claim via Deseret:
“Based on the allegations as pleaded in his own complaint, the statute of limitations for each of Hunter’s claims began to run in 2009, and we see no basis for concluding that those statutes were tolled. Since Hunter did not file his suit until 2021, the district court correctly dismissed each of the claims.”
Hunter expressed significant disappointment regarding the recent ruling, stating, “we are pressing forward.” He indicated that their intention was to assist Tony Finau and that they possess a contract recognized by the golfer. Hunter criticized the opposing party for having “legally weaseled their way out of it over a statute of limitations claim,” describing the situation as “totally shameful and disappointing.”
Leave a Reply