Digital Access

Digital Access
Access and all Shaw Media Illinois content from all your digital devices and receive breaking news and updates from around the area.

Home Delivery

Home Delivery
Want to make sure you receive the latest local news? We’ve got you covered! Get the best in local news, sports, community events, with focus on what’s coming up for the weekend. Weekly mail subscription offers

Text Alerts

Text Alerts
Choose your news! Select the text alerts you want to receive: breaking news, prep sports, weather, and more. Text alerts are a free service from Kane County Chronicle, but text rates may apply.

Email Newsletters

Email Newsletters
Sign up for free email alerts. We'll deliver news & updates to your inbox.

Lawsuit targets Diamond-Mart

GENEVA – Claiming it is owed more than $80,000, a company that supplied diamonds to Diamond-Mart in St. Charles has filed a lawsuit against the jewelry store, which is in the midst of a going-out-of-business sale.

The suit, brought by R.S. Diamonds of Chicago, seeks to recover the merchandise that was supplied. A temporary restraining order was issued, aimed to stop Diamond-Mart from selling that merchandise.

But on Thursday at the Kane County Courthouse in Geneva, Diamond-Mart president Randall Matz said that most of that merchandise had been sold. All that was remaining from R.S. Diamonds, Matz said, were two diamonds valued at $140. Those diamonds, Matz said, were part of a set of earrings.

Judge Kevin Busch ruled that the plaintiffs may review invoices and sales receipts to see whether the diamonds supplied had been sold. The two sides are due back in court at 9 a.m. June 27.

The lawsuit claims R.S. Diamonds is owed $80,499.75. The suit does not affect Diamond-Mart’s going-out-of-business sale. Matz said Thursday’s court appearance was about no more than the two diamonds because “the merchandise already has been sold.”

“We’re talking about two diamonds, valued at $140,” Matz said outside of the courtroom.

Robert Dawidiuk, the attorney for R.S. Diamonds, said that “is not entirely true.”

“It freezes all of those diamonds,” Dawidiuk said. “What the defendant said is they have sold many of those diamonds. ... Right now, we’re looking for him to return the diamonds, if he has them. If not, we will look at all the remedies we have.”

Dawidiuk said the diamonds were sold “over a period of years.”

In the motion for the temporary restraining order, R.S. Diamonds claimed that the inventory of diamonds “is the only means by which [the defendants] can repay plaintiff, and plaintiff will suffer an irreparable harm if it cannot prevent defendants from becoming insolvent and transferring their only means to repay plaintiff.”

Representing himself in court, Matz said that since the diamonds were part of a set of earrings, that it would be better if he could repay the value of those diamonds and asked Busch whether it would be better if Matz could write a check for that amount.

“I’m guessing you could write them a check for $80,000,” Busch said.

“That can’t happen,” Matz said.

Matz said the temporary restraining order wouldn’t cover more than the earrings. Busch said he would enforce that.

“Don’t sell the earrings,” Busch said.

Dawidiuk said that while he understands that it is a difficult economic time for those selling diamonds, “it’s a difficult time for my client as well.”

“He can’t just walk away from $80,000,” Dawidiuk said.

Loading more