Westover Court Corp. v. Eley
| Decision Date | 25 November 1946 |
| Docket Number | Record No. 3124. |
| Citation | 185 Va. 718 |
| Parties | WESTOVER COURT CORPORATION, ET AL. v. EDWARD H. ELEY, ET AL. |
| Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
Present, Holt, C.J., and Hudgins, Gregory, Eggleston and Buchanan, JJ.
1. LIMITATION OF ACTIONS — Periods of Limitation — Actions That Survive under Five-Year Limitation. — Under section 5818 of the Code of 1942, prescribing a five-year limitation for actions which survive, the actions that survive are those for wrong to property, real or personal, or which grow out of breach of contract, but not for wrongs done to the person or reputation, or any purely personal wrong, apart from property or contract.
2. LIMITATION OF ACTIONS — Period of Limitation — Action to Recover for Inadequacy of Heating Plant — Case at Bar. — In the instant case, an action to recover for damages incurred by reason of certain false representations by which plaintiffs were induced to purchase a residence, defendants' agent represented that the dwelling contained an adequate heating plant, whereas it did not.
Held: That the inadequacy of the heating plant amounted to a direct damage to plaintiffs' property and estate and that the five-year statute of limitations, section 5818 of the Code of 1942, applied.
3. FRAUD AND DECEIT — Sufficiency of Evidence — False Representations as to Adequacy of Heating Plant in Dwelling — Case at Bar. — In the instant case, an action to recover for damages incurred by reason of certain false representations by which plaintiffs were induced to purchase a residence, defendants' agent represented that the dwelling contained an adequate heating plant, whereas it did not. One of plaintiffs testified that the agent had represented that the heating plant would heat the house to seventy degrees in zero weather and that he relied on the representation and was induced thereby to purchase the property. The testimony of this plaintiff was corroborated and there was no contradiction that the heating plant was not satisfactory.
Held: That the representations were of an existing fact, they induced the purchaser to believe them, they were meant to be acted on, the purchaser acted on them and as a result sustained damages and was entitled to recover.
Error to a judgment of the Law and Equity Court of the city of Richmond, Part Two. Hon. Haskins Hobson, judge presiding.
The opinion states the case.
Robert C. Lyne, for the plaintiffs in error.
George E. Haw, for the defendants in error.
A judgment for $350 was recovered in the trial court by Edward H. Eley and Lillian L. Fley against Westover Court Corporation and Alfred L. Blake and Sons, Inc., for damages alleged to have occurred by reason of certain false representations made by an agent of Alfred L. Blake and Sons, Inc., to Mr. Eley, who, relying upon said representations was induced to purchase a residence.
The facts as developed from the plaintiff's standpoint are that Mr. and Mrs. Eley agreed to purchase from the Westover Court Corporation through Alfred L. Blake and Sons, Inc., agents, a residence, for the sum of $5,016 upon the installment plan. Previous to this contract the firm of Rose and Lafoon had commenced a real estate development known as Westover Court. A number of bungalow houses had been construed and sold for around $5,000, and in each of them a sufficient heating plant had been installed.
Later, due to the shortage of materials and inability to get the best equipment, Rose and Lafoon, in the place of installing heating plants like those previously installed in their houses, were forced to turn to a new furnace known as the Fluemaster. N. W. Martin and Brothers, heating contractors, made a price upon the Fluemaster to the builders, which was accepted, and the Fluemaster was installed in some fifty houses for the Westover Court Corporation. This corporation had succeeded to the right, title and interest of the firm of Rose and Lafoon in the development, and continued the construction of other houses.
The Westover Court Corporation employed Alfred L. Blake and Sons, Inc., of which I. Norris Blake was the secretary and a director, to make sale of these houses. Alfred L. Blake and Sons, Inc., had a number of salesmen engaged for the purpose of making sale of lots and houses in this development. Among them was one J. T. Keuster. All of these agents operated under the direction and instruction of Mr. I. Norris Blake.
Mr. and Mrs. Eley bought their property on August 23, 1943, at which time the dwelling was not entirely completed. Mr. Eley had been approached by the agent, J. T. Keuster, who showed him the house, at which time Mr. Eley made inquiry of Mr. Keuster regarding the heating plant. Mr. Keuster then informed Mr. Eley that the heating plant was adequate and would give good service. He represented to Mr. Eley that it would heat the house to seventy degrees in zero weather. Mr. Eley testified that he relied on this representation as to the furnace and was induced thereby to enter into the contract for the purchase of the property.
When cold weather came a fire was built in the furnace to give it a try-out and it was then learned that the system was inadequate and would not properly heat the house.
The evidence shows that these heating plants were unsatisfactory in some of the other houses in which they had been installed in this development. In addition to their failure to heat the houses,...
To continue reading
Request your trial