L.L. v. State L.L. v. State

L.L. v. State

2002.IN.0000581

    • $0.99
    • $0.99

Publisher Description

VAN SANT, Commissioner. The action was instituted by appellants, George E. and Virgie M. Adams, against appellees, Fada Realty Company, Evola Realty Company, and Archer-Meder Company, to recover damages they suffered as a result of being induced to purchase a house and lot in Louisville by fraudulent misrepresentations as to the quality of material used and work performed in its construction. The answer consisted of a general denial of all the allegations of the petition. The first witness to be introduced was appellant George E. Adams. Counsel for appellees were permitted to conduct a voir dire examination before he proceeded with his direct testimony. This examination disclosed that he had made an offer in writing to appellees to purchase the house in question, which offer was accepted, and at the time of the purchase of the property appellees delivered to him a deed of conveyance which was accepted by him and his wife. Upon this showing the Court refused to permit parol evidence to be introduced concerning any representation made to him as purchaser of the property which was not incorporated into the written contract of purchase or the deed. This ruling was made by the Court upon the theory that parol evidence is incompetent to vary the terms of a written contract. However, Mr. Adams was permitted to testify as to the misrepresentations and the faulty construction of and inferior materials used in the construction of the house for the purpose of incorporating this testimony into an avowal to perfect the record. This testimony shows facts from which a jury could conclude that the agent of appellees represented that the property was constructed of first class materials, and that the work of construction was performed in a workmanlike manner. It likewise disclosed facts from which the jury could conclude that inferior materials were used, and that the work was not performed in a workmanlike manner. It is unnecessary, for the purpose of this opinion, to recite the testimony in detail.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
2002
5 September
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
9
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SELLER
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
SIZE
49.1
KB

More Books by In the Court of Appeals of Indiana

Hart v. State Hart v. State
2005
Burgess v. E.L.C. Electric Burgess v. E.L.C. Electric
2005
State v. Neanover State v. Neanover
2004
Coutee v. Lefayette Neighborhood Housing Services Coutee v. Lefayette Neighborhood Housing Services
2003
Winebrenner v. State Winebrenner v. State
2003
Williamson v. Williamson Williamson v. Williamson
2005