Duggin v. Adams
Virginia Supreme Court
360 S.E.2d 832 (1987)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
Kenneth Duggin (plaintiff) entered into a contract to purchase land from Betty Williams. C. Douglas Adams (defendant), an attorney, represented Williams in connection with the purchase. After Duggin disclosed to Adams that Duggin would be selling the land to a third party willing to pay an assignment fee, Adams informed Duggin that Duggin had breached his contract with Williams and forfeited his deposit. Adams then had Williams give Adams the right to purchase her property and cancel her contract with Duggin. Adams prepared a letter that Williams sent to Duggin canceling their contract. Duggin sued Adams, alleging that Adams tortiously interfered with Duggin’s contract rights with Williams. Duggin alleged that when Adams learned that a third party was willing to pay an additional fee to purchase the land, Adams induced Williams to cancel her contract with Duggin and enter into a contract with Adams that Adams would then sell to the third party. Duggin alleged that Adams, who represented himself as acting as Williams’s attorney, willfully and maliciously concealed his true role and that he was acting on his own behalf, and Duggin would not have shared confidential information with Adams had he known Adams would use the information for his own personal gain and to Duggin’s detriment. Duggin moved for judgment, and the trial court sustained Adams’s demurrer to the allegations. Judgment was entered for Adams. Duggin appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stephenson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 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.