The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
Chesapeake Builders Inc. v. Lee
961778 Chesapeake Builders Inc. v. Lee 09/12/1997 Since the record supports the finding that the landowners in a sales transaction did not act in bad faith, the buyer was not entitled to contract damages for i…
The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
961778 Chesapeake Builders Inc. v. Lee 09/12/1997 Since the record supports the finding that the landowners in a sales transactio…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- September 12, 1997
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
961778 Chesapeake Builders Inc. v. Lee 09/12/1997 Since the record supports the finding that the landowners in a sales transaction did not act in bad faith, the buyer was not entitled to contract damages for its alleged loss of bargain. The chancellor correctly sustained the commissioner's refusal to set an abatement which would have deprived the landowners of more than two-thirds the fair market value of their lot. Final judgment is entered in favor of the buyer for specific performance of the contract.
Open court document ↗Rulings in this case over time
Courts at different levels and stages can reach different results in the same case. Each entry is the court's own record; read it before drawing a conclusion.
No official record has been found at this time. We are watching for updates.
Method: an entry is marked with an outcome only when its own text contains the outcome word, and the word is shown beside it. Orders, opinions and judgments whose text does not say are marked Other. Party filings, notices and routine procedural orders (appearances, extra pages, time extensions, scheduling) are not listed; 1 such entry was left out of this case. No link between this case and any other case is recorded in our data, so only this case's own record is shown. Open the court's docket
