Krisha v. Times-World Corp.

Roanoke County Circuit Court

Krisha v. Times-World Corp.

62 Va. Cir. 33, 2003 Va. Cir. LEXIS 123

CourtRoanoke County Circuit Court

DecidedApril 30, 2003

DocketCase No. CL00001058-00

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 62 Va. Cir. 33 (Krisha v. Times-World Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Roanoke County Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Krisha v. Times-World Corp., 62 Va. Cir. 33, 2003 Va. Cir. LEXIS 123 (Va. Super. Ct. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

By Judge Jonathan m. Apgar

Counsel for the Plaintiff has asked the Court to reconsider Judge Pattisall’s Order of August 17,2001, which sustained a demurrer to Plaintiff s claim for constructive fraud. Under the facts pleaded in this case, the Court declines to reconsider the sustained demurrer. The Couit agrees with Defendant’s argument that such a claim requires an allegation that the fraud in question relates to a present or pre-existing fact, not an unfulfilled promise or statement as to future events. Prospect Devel. Co. v. Bershader, 258 Va. 75, 86 (1999). The Plaintiff can only assert a promise as to future events.

Counsel for the Defendant has requested this Court to reconsider Judge Pattisall’s August 17th Order overruling a demurrer to Plaintiffs breach of contract claim. The Court grants the motion to reconsider and sustains the demurrer as to Plaintiffs one remaining count. This Court agrees with the proposition, as enunciated in Steele v. Isikoff, 130 F. Supp. 2d 23 (D. D.C. 2000), that a confidentiality promise in a news-gathering context does not give rise to an enforceable contract right under Virginia law, but creates, at best, a moral obligation. Such a moral obligation does not give rise to contractual liability. See Mihalcoe v. Holub, 130 Va. 425, 431 (1921).

The Plaintiff was given twenty-one days to file any amended pleadings when demurrers were sustained to counts two through eight on August 17, 2001. No amendments were filed. This Court will likewise allow twenty-one days from the entry of an Order consistent herewith for any amended pleadings the Plaintiff chooses to file as to count one.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By Judge Jonathan m. Apgar

Counsel for the Plaintiff has asked the Court to reconsider Judge Pattisall’s Order of August 17,2001, which sustained a demurrer to Plaintiff s claim for constructive fraud. Under the facts pleaded in this case, the Court declines to reconsider the sustained demurrer. The Couit agrees with Defendant’s argument that such a claim requires an allegation that the fraud in question relates to a present or pre-existing fact, not an unfulfilled promise or statement as to future events. Prospect Devel. Co. v. Bershader, 258 Va. 75, 86 (1999). The Plaintiff can only assert a promise as to future events.

Counsel for the Defendant has requested this Court to reconsider Judge Pattisall’s August 17th Order overruling a demurrer to Plaintiffs breach of contract claim. The Court grants the motion to reconsider and sustains the demurrer as to Plaintiffs one remaining count. This Court agrees with the proposition, as enunciated in Steele v. Isikoff, 130 F. Supp. 2d 23 (D. D.C. 2000), that a confidentiality promise in a news-gathering context does not give rise to an enforceable contract right under Virginia law, but creates, at best, a moral obligation. Such a moral obligation does not give rise to contractual liability. See Mihalcoe v. Holub, 130 Va. 425, 431 (1921).

The Plaintiff was given twenty-one days to file any amended pleadings when demurrers were sustained to counts two through eight on August 17, 2001. No amendments were filed. This Court will likewise allow twenty-one days from the entry of an Order consistent herewith for any amended pleadings the Plaintiff chooses to file as to count one.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 Va. Cir. 33, 2003 Va. Cir. LEXIS 123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/krisha-v-times-world-corp-vaccroanokecty-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack