Draya Michele, a well-known model, has recently filed a lawsuit against her ex-boyfriend, NFL quarterback Tyrod Taylor. In the lawsuit, Draya alleges that Tyrod failed to uphold their verbal agreement regarding the purchase of a house in Los Angeles. The model claims that Tyrod had initially allowed her and her children to move into the house under the condition that she would have the opportunity to buy it from him in the future.
According to Draya, the agreement between her and Tyrod was based on their verbal discussions and mutual understanding. She states that any financial contributions she made towards the property were intended to go towards the final purchase price of the home. However, despite her offer of $2.8 million for the house and subsequent negotiations with Tyrod raising the price to $3.2 million, Draya claims that he has now reneged on their agreement.
Draya further alleges that Tyrod has abruptly changed his stance and is now threatening to evict her from the property. Not only is he refusing to sell her the house as initially discussed, but he is also unwilling to acknowledge the investments she has made in the residence. Draya contends that Tyrod’s actions constitute a breach of contract and is seeking legal recourse to address the situation.
In her lawsuit, Draya is suing Tyrod for breach of contract and is requesting unspecified damages for the financial and emotional losses she has incurred as a result of his actions. Despite their past romantic relationship, Draya is determined to pursue justice in this matter and hold Tyrod accountable for his alleged misconduct.
The lawsuit between Draya Michele and Tyrod Taylor sheds light on the complexities of verbal agreements and the importance of documenting legal transactions. This case serves as a reminder of the potential consequences of relying solely on verbal promises, especially in high-stakes situations such as real estate deals. As the legal battle unfolds, it will be interesting to see how the court rules on the matter and what implications it may have for both parties involved.
Leave a Reply