LUCY-v.-ZEHMER-英文版

LUCYv.ZEHMERSupremeCourtofAppealsofVirginia.1954196Va.493,84S.E.2d516.BUCHANAN,JUSTICE.ThissuitwasinstitutedbyW.O.LucyandJ.C.Lucy,complainants,againstA.H.ZehmerandIdaS.Zehmer,hiswife,defendants,tohavespecificperformanceofacontractbywhichitwasallegedtheZehmershadsoldtoW.O.LucyatractoflandownedbyA.H.ZehmerinDinwiddiecountycontaining471.6acres,moreorless,knownastheFergusonfarm,for$50,000.J.C.Lucy,theothercomplainant,isabrotherofW.O.Lucy,towhomW.O.Lucytransferredahalfinterestinhisallegedpurchase.TheinstrumentsoughttobeenforcedwaswrittenbyA.H.Zehmeron[Saturday]December20,1952,inthesewords:WeherebyagreetoselltoW.O.LucytheFergusonFarmcompletefor$50,000.00,titlesatisfactorytobuyer,andsignedbythedefendants,A.H.ZehmerandIdaS.Zehmer.TheanswerofA.H.ZehmeradmittedthatatthetimementionedW.O.Lucyofferedhim$50,000cashforthefarm,butthathe,Zehmer,consideredthattheofferwasmadeinjest;thatsothinking,andbothheandLucyhavinghadseveraldrinks,hewroteoutthememorandumquotedaboveandinducedhiswifetosignit;thathedidnotdeliverthememorandumtoLucy,butthatLucypickeditup,readit,putitinhispocket,attemptedtoofferZehmer$5tobindthebargain,whichZehmerrefusedtoaccept,andrealizingforthefirsttimethatLucywasserious,Zehmerassuredhimthathehadnointentionofsellingthefarmandthatthewholematterwasajoke.Lucyleftthepremisesinsistingthathehadpurchasedthefarm.Depositionsweretakenandthedecreeappealedfromwasenteredholdingthatthecomplainantshadfailedtoestablishtheirrighttospecificperformance,anddismissingtheirbill.Theassignmentoferroristothisactionofthecourt.ThedefendantsinsistthattheevidencewasampletosupporttheircontentionthatthewritingsoughttobeenforcedwaspreparedasabluffordaretoforceLucytoadmitthathedidnothave$50,000;thatthewholematterwasajoke;thatthewritingwasnotdeliveredtoLucyandnobindingcontractwasevermadebetweentheparties.Itisanunusual,ifnotbizarre,defense.Whenmadetothewritingadmittedlypreparedbyoneofthedefendantsandsignedbyboth,clearevidenceisrequiredtosustainit.InhistestimonyZehmerclaimedthathewashighasaGeorgiapine,andthatthetransactionwasjustabunchoftwodoggoneddrunksbluffingtoseewhocouldtalkthebiggestandsaythemost.Thatclaimisinconsistentwithhisattempttotestifyingreatdetailastowhatwassaidandwhatwasdone.Itiscontradictedbyotherevidenceastotheconditionofbothparties,andrenderedofnoweightbythetestimonyofhiswifethatwhenLucylefttherestaurantshesuggestedthatZehmerdrivehimhome.TherecordisconvincingthatZehmerwasnotintoxicatedtotheextentofbeingunabletocomprehendthenatureandconsequencesoftheinstrumentheexecuted,andhencethatinstrumentisnottobeinvalidatedonthatground.C.J.S.Contracts,§,133,b.,p.483;Taliaferrov.Emery,124Va.674,98S.E.627.Itwasinfactconcededbydefendants'counselinoralargumentthatundertheevi-denceZehmerwasnottoodrunktomakeavalidcontract.TheevidenceisconvincingalsothatZehmerwrotetwoagreements,thefirstonebeginningIherebyagreetosell.Zehmerfirstsaidhecouldnotrememberaboutthat,thenthatIdon'tthinkIwrotebutoneout.Mrs.Zehmersaidthatwhathewrotewas`Iherebyagree,butthattheIwaschangedtoWeafterthatnight.Theagreementthatwaswrittenandsignedisintherecordandindicatesnosuchchange.NeitherarethemistakesinspellingthatZehmersoughttopointoutreadilyapparent.Theappearanceofthecontract,thefactthatitwasunderdiscussionforfortyminutesormorebeforeitwassigned;Lucy'sobjectiontothefirstdraftbecauseitwaswritteninthesingular,andhewantedMrs.Zehmertosignitalso;therewritingtomeetthatobjectionandthesigningbyMrs.Zehmer;thediscussionofwhatwastobeincludedinthesale,theprovisionfortheexaminationofthetitle,thecompletenessoftheinstrumentthatwasexecuted,thetakingpossessionofitbyLucywithnorequestorsuggestionbyeitherofthedefendantsthathegiveitback,arefactswhichfurnishpersuasiveevidencethattheexecutionofthecontractwasaseriousbusinesstransactionratherthanacasualjestingmatterasdefendantsnowcontend..Ifitbeassumed,contrarytowhatwethinktheevidenceshows,thatZehmerwasjestingaboutsellinghisfarmtoLucyandthatthetransac-tionwasintendedbyhimtobeajoke,neverthelesstheevidenceshowsthatLucydidnotsounderstanditbutconsideredittobeaseriousbusinesstransactionandthecontracttobebindingontheZehmersaswellasonhimself.Theverynextdayhearrangedwithhisbrothertoputuphalfthemoneyandtakeahalfinterestintheland.Thedayafterthatheemployedanattorneytoexaminethetitle.Thenextnight,Tuesday,hewasbackatZehmer'splaceandthereZehmertoldhimforthefirsttime,Lucysaid,thathewasn'tgoingtosellandhetoldZehmerYouknowyousoldthatplacefairandsquare.AfterreceivingthereportfromhisattorneythatthetitlewasgoodhewrotetoZehmerthathewasreadytoclosethedeal.NotonlydidLucyactuallybelieve,buttheevidenceshowshewaswarrantedinbelieving,thatthecontractrepresentedaseriousbusinesstransactionandagoodfaithsaleandpurchaseofthefarm.Inthefieldofcontracts,asgenerallyelsewhere,Wemustlooktotheoutwardexpressionofapersonasmanifestinghisintentionratherthantohissecretandunexpressedintention.`Thelawimputestoapersonanintentioncorrespondingtothereasonablemeaningofhiswordsandacts.'FirstNat.ExchangeBankofRoanokev.RoanokeOilCo.,169Va.99,114,192S.E.764,770.AtnotimepriortotheexecutionofthecontracthadZ