Legal Opinion
Davis v. Holsten
Supreme Court of Virginia
Decided November 4, 2005No. Record 050215PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ELIZABRTH B. LACY, Justice.
In this appeal, Kenneth A. Davis asserts that the trial court erred in ruling that substantial compliance does not apply to an escrow agreement obligating him to remove and replace synthetic stucco siding and rotten wood from a house and seeks a reversal of the trial court's finding that he did not comply with the terms of the agreement. Because we conclude that the trial court was correct in its application of the law and that its findings of fact are supported by the record, we will affirm the judgment of the trial court.
FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
On July 11, 2002,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Taft v. TaftMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Valentine Oil Co. v. PowersNebraska Supreme Court · 1953
- Hoffman Family, L.L.C. v. Mill Two Associates PartnershipSupreme Court of Virginia · 2000
- Tauber v. Commonwealth Ex Rel. KilgoreSupreme Court of Virginia · 2002
- Hart v. BarronMontana Supreme Court · 1949
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Nichols Const. v. Virginia MacHine ToolSupreme Court of Virginia · 2008
- Scott v. ClarkeDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2019
- F & W Management Corp. v. American Shelter Corp.Roanoke County Circuit Court · 2006
- United Business Bank v. GawadDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2024