Grayson v. Buchanan

Citations

• 88 Va. 251
• 13 S.E. 457
• 1891 Va. LEXIS 26

Syllabus

<p>1. Sale of Lands—Construction—Presumption.—Where vendor sells land describing it in the contract as “ containing 140 acres more or less, and known as the Kelly Tract, for the price of 86,000.00,” the presumption is that the quantity influenced the price, and that the sale is by the acre, and not in gross, unless there be evidence to the contrary.</p> <p>2. Idem—Misrepresentation—Abatement.—If vendor represented the tract as containing 140 acres and one-half of a certain spring, when it contained only 126 acres and not the spring, vendee is entitled to abatement of pi’ice for loss of one-half of the spring and deficiency of area. Abatement for deficiency should be according to average value of the entire tract, and for loss of one-lialf of the spring to the extent the tract, estimated at 86,000.00, was damaged thereby.</p> <p>3. Idem—Conflicting evidence—Verdict.—Where the evidence is conflicting and the jury find for the defendant, their verdict will not be disturbed by this court.</p> <p>4. Idem—Unilateral mistake—Reformation—Parol evidence—Plea of set-off.—• Though written contract fails to mention the spring, and a bill in equity is brought to reform contract, alleging mistake on one side, accompanied by misrepresentations on the other, parol evidence is admissible to show the true contract, and relief will be granted. And so, likewise, where the defence is made in action at law for the price, by. special plea in the nature of set-off, under Code, §3299; and such plea is allowable in such a case.</p> <p>5. Practice at Common Law—Plea of set-off—-Affidavit—Harmless error.— Where plea in the nature of set-off filed in such case sufficiently conforms to the statute, but was not sworn to, such defect is not one for which judgment will be reversed, inasmuch as, upon survey of entire record, the judgment appears to be substantially right.</p> <p>6. Idem — Plea—Duplicity—Duplicity in a plea could be objected to at common law, only by special demurrer, which is not no