Then I put the grief away.
Not permanently. You don’t put grief away permanently. But you can set it on a shelf for a while and pick it up again when you have more time for it.
What I had time for now was the situation.
Rachel called on Tuesday.
She had waited two days, which told me she was a careful person, as I had always believed.
“Grandma,” she said.
“Rachel,” I said.
“I’m so sorry,” she said.
The specific quality of this apology: it was not performed. It was not the apology of someone who has been told to call and who is following instructions. It had the quality of genuine distress.
“Tell me what you know,” I said.
She told me.
She had not known my name was not on the list until the ceremony had started and her maid of honor had whispered to her that there was a situation at the entrance. She had not known what the situation was until after the reception, when Gerald had told her that I had arrived and there had been a mix-up and I had gone home.
She had not known about the mix-up.
She had not known that I had paid for most of the wedding.
She had believed, she said, that her parents had paid for the wedding and that I had contributed something toward it, the way grandparents sometimes contributed.
I said: I paid for the hotel, the flowers, the musicians, and the photographer. I also transferred twelve thousand dollars to your parents for additional expenses.
She was quiet for a moment.
Then she said: “Dad told me they were paying for the wedding.”
“Yes,” I said.
“He said—” She stopped. “Grandma.”
“Yes.”
“I didn’t know,” she said.
“I know you didn’t,” I said.
She was quiet for a while.
“What are you going to do?” she said.
“I’m pursuing the legal options available to me,” I said.
“Are you going to sue them?” she said.
“I’m going to require them to account for what happened,” I said. “What that produces is up to Robert and what your parents decide to do.”
“Is there anything I can do?” she said.
I thought about this.
“Be well,” I said. “You married a good person. I could tell when I met him. Concentrate on the marriage.”
“I want to see you,” she said.
“Come see me when you’re back from your honeymoon,” I said. “Bring Daniel. We’ll have dinner.”
“Grandma,” she said.
“Yes.”
“I’m sorry you weren’t there,” she said. “I’m sorry you weren’t in the room.”
I thought about the candlelit tables and the white flowers on the arch and the gold glow of the reception room beginning to come alive.
“So am I,” I said.
I had been the one who suggested the gold lighting.
I said nothing about this.
Robert called on Wednesday.
He said: “Gerald’s attorney has been in touch.”
“He retained an attorney,” I said.
“A local attorney named Dawkins,” he said. “We know each other slightly. The initial contact was to acknowledge receipt of the demand and to request an extension of the response period.”
“From thirty days to what?” I said.
“Sixty,” he said.
“Why?” I said.
“They want time to assess the documentation,” he said. “My read is that Gerald looked at the invoices and realized the exposure is more significant than he expected.”
“He didn’t know what I had spent,” I said.
“He knew the transfer amount,” Robert said. “He may not have tracked the direct payments as carefully.”
“He didn’t track anything,” I said. “He accepted the money and moved on.”
“Yes,” Robert said. “Which is going to be a problem for him when Dawkins explains that the direct payments are well-documented.”
“Agree to the extension?” I said.
“I’d recommend it,” he said. “We’re in no hurry. Every day is a day the record grows.”
“Yes,” I said.
“I also want to tell you something,” he said. “I’ve done some research on the implied contract question. There’s a line of cases in Georgia that I think is favorable. Not certain, but favorable. If we end up in court, I think we have a reasonable argument.”
“I want you to proceed as if we’re going to court,” I said. “Prepare the case fully. Whatever Dawkins offers in settlement, I want to know what we would get if we went to court.”
“Understood,” he said.
The summer passed the way the summer passes in Savannah: slowly and with heat.
I gardened.
I read.
I had lunch with my friend Margaret, who had known James and who knew everyone in Savannah and who was the one person I told the full story to.
Margaret listened to all of it.
Then she said: “Gerald always made me nervous.”
“When?” I said.
“When you brought him to things,” she said. “He had a way of—watching you. Not warmly.”
“I thought he was attentive,” I said.
“That’s not the same thing,” she said.
I had been thinking about this distinction.
Attentive is a quality that serves the person being attended to. Watching is a quality that serves the watcher.
Gerald had been watching me for years.
I had mistaken it for attention.
Rachel and Daniel came for dinner in August.
They had been back from their honeymoon for two weeks, and Rachel had called to confirm, and I had made the meal I made for people I wanted to feed properly: the roast chicken with the herbs from the garden, the potato gratin, the lemon tart for dessert.
Daniel was, as I had suspected, careful. He sat at the kitchen table while I finished the sauce and talked to me about his work, which was urban planning, which was interesting enough that I asked several questions before dinner was on the table.
Rachel helped with the salad.
We ate in the dining room, which I used for occasions.
Daniel said, at some point toward the end of the main course: “Eleanor. I want you to know that I didn’t know any of this until Rachel told me. The week after the wedding.”
“I assumed as much,” I said.
“I want to say also,” he said, “that Rachel and I have had several conversations about what this means for her relationship with her parents.”
I looked at Rachel.
She said: “I’m still processing.”
“Take your time,” I said.
“I’m also angry,” she said. “I’m angry that they lied to me about who paid for the wedding. I’m angry that you were excluded. I don’t know yet what I’m going to do about it.”
“You don’t have to do anything on my behalf,” I said.
“This isn’t only on your behalf,” she said. “This is about who they are. And about what they thought of me, that I would be fine with this if I didn’t know.”
I thought about this.
“They may have thought you wouldn’t find out,” I said.
“Which makes it worse,” she said.
“Yes,” I said.
We had the lemon tart.
Daniel asked about the garden and I told him about the late roses and the jasmine and the difficulty of the summer heat.
Before they left, Rachel hugged me at the door.
She held on for a moment longer than the ordinary departing hug.
She said: “I love you, Grandma.”
“I love you too,” I said.
They drove away.
I stood at the door for a moment.
Then I went inside and sat in the study with the folder and made a note.
I have always made notes. James said I was the only person he knew who made notes about her own life as she was living it. He did not say this disparagingly. He found it characteristic.
The note said: Rachel knows. She is deciding what to do. This is her decision to make.
Robert called in September.
He said: “Dawkins has made an offer.”
“Tell me,” I said.
“They are offering to return the transfer amount of twelve thousand dollars and to pay the photographer’s remaining balance as a gesture of good faith. They are not offering to return the direct payments and they are characterizing those as voluntary gifts.”
“No,” I said.
“I expected that would be your answer,” he said.
“What does voluntary gift mean in law?” I said.
“In law, a gift is a voluntary transfer of property without consideration. Without consideration means without something received in return. Their argument would be that you made these payments as a grandmother’s gift to her granddaughter and that no service or benefit was expected in return.”
“I was expected to be in the room,” I said.
“That’s our argument,” he said. “That the payments were made in contemplation of participation, not as unconditional gifts. The question is whether a court would agree.”
“How confident are you?” I said.
“More confident than I was in July,” he said. “I found three cases in the last fifteen years where implied consideration arguments succeeded in similar family event contexts. Not identical. But similar.”
“File the suit,” I said.
He was quiet for a moment.
“Eleanor,” he said. “I want to make sure you understand what this means. A suit against your son will become a public record. It will require depositions. It will require Gerald and Catherine to sit across from me and answer questions about what happened. It will take months, possibly over a year.”
“I understand,” I said.
“It will also cost you money,” he said. “My fees, the filing, the litigation costs.”
“How much?” I said.
“Dependent on how contested it becomes,” he said. “Somewhere between fifteen and forty thousand dollars.”
“The principle is not about money,” I said. “You know that.”
“Yes,” he said. “But I want you to know the cost of the principle.”
“File it,” I said.
He filed it.
Gerald’s attorney, Dawkins, escalated the response to a motion to dismiss on the grounds that the payments were gifts and that there was no implied contract.
Robert filed the opposition.
He attached the invoices, the email chain with Gerald’s confirmation, and a brief that I read with the specific attention I gave to every document Robert sent me.
The brief argued three things.
First, that the direct payments were in my name and for services rendered at an event from which I was excluded, creating a cause of action for unjust enrichment regardless of whether an implied contract existed.
Second, that Gerald’s confirmation email established that the transfer payment was for specific expenses, not an unconditional gift, and that this characterization created an implied obligation.
Third, that the totality of the circumstances, the planning period, the signed invoices, the coordination role, the exclusion without notice, established a course of dealing that supported the implied contract theory.
The judge denied the motion to dismiss.
Robert called me to tell me.
He said: “The case proceeds. I want to be honest: a denial of dismissal means the suit can continue, not that we’ve won. Dawkins will fight on the merits.”
“Good,” I said.
“You’re not tired of this?” he said.
“No,” I said.
“It’s been four months,” he said.
“Robert,” I said. “I have been planning and funding family events for decades. I taught my children what responsibility looked like. I kept every receipt and every contract and every email confirmation because James taught me that paperwork was how you respected the arrangements you made. I have a folder on my desk with fifty nine thousand dollars of documentation. I am not tired.”
See more on the next page
