Opinion ID: 1617337
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Directed Verdict or J.N.O.V. on Proximate Cause

Text: In the Forbus fraud trial, a jury awarded the Forbuses $300,000 in unspecified damages. The case had been submitted to the jury after Cochran and City Realty moved for and were denied a directed verdict. Motions for directed verdict and j.n.o.v. both test the sufficiency of the evidence and are reviewed under the same standard. Green Tree Acceptance, Inc. v. Standridge, 565 So.2d 38, 44 (Ala.1990). To withstand a defendant's motion for directed verdict, i.e., in order for a plaintiff's claims to be submitted to a jury, the plaintiff must have presented substantial evidence in support of each element of his or her claims. General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Covington, 586 So.2d 178, 181 (Ala.1991). Substantial evidence is evidence of such weight and quality that fair-minded persons in the exercise of impartial judgment can reasonably infer the existence of the fact sought to be proved. West v. Founders Life Assurance Co. of Florida, 547 So.2d 870, 871 (Ala.1989). A critical element of a fraud claim is that the plaintiff's damage or loss was a proximate result of the alleged misrepresentation. Green Tree Acceptance, 565 So.2d at 42. City Realty and Cochran argue that there was no substantial evidence that the Forbuses were damaged as a proximate result of Cochran's actions, because, they say, the Forbuses had had the opportunity to buy the Blair property on June 25 and had lost that opportunity through their own failure to act. Accordingly, say Cochran and City Realty, the trial court erred in denying their motion for a directed verdict at trial and later in denying them a j.n.o.v. In simple terms, the evidence indicates that Cochran bought her client's property at approximately $20,000 below market value, and $15,000 below the price the clients of another agent were willing to pay. The evidence further discloses that at the time of the Forbuses' $85,000 offer, there was no contract for sale pending. [3] Cochran admits that she told Scoggins she had a contract pending. Cochran admitted that on June 26, when Mary Forbus met with Scoggins to look at the house again, Cochran told Scoggins that the house was sold; she told her this when Scoggins came by City Realty for the Blair house key. The evidence is unrefuted that the property was not in fact sold at that time. It is also unrefuted that the Forbuses failed to make an offer on June 25, as Cochran and City Realty assert (in arguing that the Forbuses missed their last chance to buy the property). However, to suggest that this fact is significant is to overlook the fact that the Forbuses actually could have made an offer up to June 27, but understood differently because their agent, Scoggins, had been told by Cochran on June 26 that the Blair property was sold. The property was not actually sold until June 27, nor was there any contract for sale until that date. On June 27 Cochran first presented Mrs. Blair with her offer in the form of a proposed contract for sale (which was back-dated to June 25), for Mrs. Blair to execute as the contract of the parties. Stated differently, the evidence indicates that the Forbuses' purported missed opportunity on June 25 was not actually a last chance; thus, their missing that opportunity did not result in loss to them through their own fault, as the defendants contend. There is considerable evidence that the Forbuses actually missed their last chance to buy the Blair property because Scoggins, at Cochran's direction, told Mary Forbus on June 26 that the Blair property was sold. In truth, the Forbuses could have acted on June 26 had they not believed the property had been sold. Equally important, the evidence indicates that had it not been for the Cochran's failure to advise Mrs. Blair of the Forbuses' willingness to pay $85,000 when that willingness was first related to her by Scoggins, the Forbuses would not have been in an urgent situation on June 25. Mrs. Blair testified, without objection, that she would have accepted an $85,000 offer had it been relayed to her by Cochran. Based on the foregoing, we are unpersuaded by Cochran and City Realty's argument that the Forbuses caused their own loss of the Blair property through their inaction on June 25. [4]