DeVenney v. Hill
Alabama Supreme Court
918 So.2d 106 (2005)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
John J. ("Jack") and Shirley Ann DeVenney (plaintiffs) sued David Eason, Mason Hill, H. Frank Thomas III, and Community Bank & Trust (defendants) over a complex transaction in which the DeVenneys sold some real property to Eason, and Eason assigned the sale contract to Hill and Thomas. The contract called for the DeVenneys to accept Eason's postdated checks for $150,000 of the $300,000 purchase price. Mrs. DeVenney commented at closing that this was essentially a loan that she expected Eason to repay when the checks became cashable 30 days later. In fact, the checks were never honored. The trial court entered summary judgment for the DeVenneys against Eason, but dismissed the DeVenney's breach-of-contract claim against Hill, Thomas, and the bank. The trial court also denied the DeVenney's assertion of an implied vendor's lien that would take precedence over the bank's mortgage lien on the property. The DeVenneys appealed to the Supreme Court of Alabama. The appellate court ruled that, as assignees of the contract, Hill and Thomas had a contractual duty, which they breached, to ensure that Eason made good on the postdated checks. The court then turned to the vendor's lien issue.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (See, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
