We find, as did the trial court, that the Act, by its express terms, is applicable only to actions sounding in negligence resulting in death or injuries to persons or damage to property, and that the Act is not applicable to claims for fraud involving failure to disclose a malfunctioning septic system. Accordingly, we affirm the order granting the realty company's petition to stay and set aside execution. The trial court, the Honorable David E. Grine, issued a Rule to Show Cause on the petition to stay execution, and the Homeowners filed their Answer to that petition. The Homeowners now appeal. Brief for Appellant at 3.
Homeowners also argue that the court erred in granting the stay of execution.
The grant of a stay of execution is within the sound discretion of the trial court and its decision will not be disturbed absent a clear abuse of that discretion. A court, in exercising this power, should not stay an execution unless the facts warrant an exercise of judicial discretion. Kronz , supra. Appellate review of equitable matters is limited to a determination of whether the trial court committed an error of law or abused its discretion. In all actions brought to recover damages for negligence resulting in death or injury to person or property, the fact that the plaintiff may have been guilty of contributory negligence shall not bar a recovery by the plaintiff or his legal representative where such negligence was not greater than the causal negligence of the defendant or defendants against whom recovery is sought, but any damages sustained by the plaintiff shall be diminished in proportion to the amount of negligence attributed to the plaintiff.