Levin v. Favorite

PER Curiam. This case was tried below by Judge Harlan, sitting without a jury, in the Baltimore City Court. The plaintiff-appellee instituted a suit at law, claiming damages for the alleged default of the defendants-appellants, in failing to consummate an executed contract of sale of leasehold property. Judge Harlan found for the plaintiff and awarded damages in the amount of $1,500, the difference between the contract price and the price at which the property was later sold to another party.

The defendants appeal. They contend that the trial court erred in failing to find (1) that there was a misrepresentation as to the zoning of the property on the part of the plaintiff-seller, and (2) that there was a mutual mistake of fact made by the parties, either of which would render the contract voidable at the option of the appellants-buyers. Both contentions center around the fact that the property was being used as seven apartments, or dwelling units, under a temporary certificate from the Building Inspection Engineer (which the appellant, Evelyn Levin, admitted reading), pending approval or disapproval “of the application after the building has been fully inspected,” but was not actually zoned for use and occupancy as a seven-unit multiple family dwelling. The case, in large measure, turns upon a proper determination of the facts involved.

It will suffice to say that Judge Harlan found that the appellants had not “met the burden ⁶²⁸ to show there was any misrepresentation under all of the evidence; [and] that there [was] no evidence to show fraud * * *, nor [was] there any evidence to show a mutual mistake of fact * * *” 1 and, after a careful analysis of