Trinity Homes, LLC v. Fang
Virginia Circuit Court
63 Va. Cir. 409 (2003)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
Chin Seng Fang and Carol Fang (defendants) made an offer to sell real property to Trinity Homes, LLC (Trinity) and Seabring Development, L.L.C. (Seabring) (plaintiffs). Trinity and Seabring wanted to accept the offer. Their agent, Damon Stewart, claimed that he sent Trinity and Seabring’s acceptance, in the form of a purchase agreement, via a fax to the Fangs’ agent, T.H. Nicholson. Stewart claimed to have placed the agreement in the fax machine, dialed Nicholson’s number, pushed the button to start the transmission, and then left to run an errand. The fax machine was old and did not have the ability to verify a fax’s transmission or its receipt. There were also no phone records of the transmission. Shortly after the fax was purportedly sent, Nicholson called Stewart to say that the Fangs no longer wished to sell the property and were therefore revoking their offer. Trinity and Seabring sued the Fangs, arguing that the Fangs’ revocation was ineffective because the offer had already been accepted when the fax was sent.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jacobson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 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.
