Joseph F. John v. Richard Ringer

Summary

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the denial of Joseph F. John's motion for a new trial following a jury verdict arising from construction-loan and owner-financing agreements concerning real property. The court held that John's argument regarding the parties' first breach was waived, that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding that John failed to timely foreclose, and that the trial court properly declined to instruct the jury on an improper measure of repair damages. The jury had awarded John $15,000 on the promissory note and Richard Ringer $51,361.09 on his breach-of-contract counterclaim.

Holdings

1. John waived his argument that Ringer breached first and therefore excused John's performance because he did not timely raise the argument in the circuit court, move for a directed verdict on that basis, or object to the jury instructions.
2. The evidence reasonably supported the jury's finding that John breached the parties' contract by failing to foreclose on the property in a timely fashion after Ringer advised that he could not obtain a deed from the Kinsers.
3. The circuit court properly refused to instruct the jury on John's expert testimony because the expert's estimates did not constitute the proper measure of damages for the submitted claim and were not relevant to the loss-of-use claim presented to the jury.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court erred by allowing Ringer's breach-of-contract counterclaim to be submitted to the jury after directing a verdict for John on John's breach claim concerning the $15,000 loan agreement.
2. Whether the evidence supported the jury's finding that John breached the contractual requirement to foreclose on the property in a timely fashion after Ringer was unable to obtain a deed from the Kinsers.
3. Whether the circuit court erred by refusing to instruct the jury concerning John's expert testimony about the costs of replacing and repairing the property.

Disposition

affirmed