Hoffman v. Horton
10 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 338, 212 Va. 565, 186 S.E.2d 79 (1972)
Rule of Law:
An auctioneer at a foreclosure sale for real property has the discretion to reopen bidding if a higher bid is submitted immediately prior to or simultaneously with the fall of the hammer, adopting the rule applicable to the sale of goods under the Uniform Commercial Code.
Facts:
- Defendants Horton and Kaul owned the 'Field Tract' in Arlington County, which became subject to a foreclosure sale.
- During the auction, Plaintiff Hoffman placed a bid of $177,000 for the property.
- The auctioneer announced 'Sold' and struck his fist against his hand to signal the acceptance of Hoffman's bid.
- Immediately prior to or simultaneously with the falling of the auctioneer's fist, another bidder offered $178,000.
- The auctioneer initially missed this higher bid, but a trustee standing nearby immediately informed him of it.
- Despite Hoffman's claim that he had already purchased the property, the auctioneer reopened the bidding.
- Hoffman eventually won the auction with a final bid of $194,000.
- Hoffman paid the $17,000 difference between his initial accepted bid and the final price under protest.
Procedural Posture:
- Hoffman filed a civil action against the former owners and trustees in the trial court to recover the $17,000 difference paid under protest.
- The trial court denied Hoffman's claim, ruling that the auctioneer acted within his discretion.
- The Supreme Court of Virginia granted Hoffman a writ of error to review the trial court's judgment.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an auctioneer at a real estate foreclosure sale have the discretion to reopen bidding when a higher bid is submitted immediately prior to or simultaneously with the auctioneer's announcement that the property is sold?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Carrico
Yes, an auctioneer retains the discretion to reopen bidding in this specific context. Although the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) explicitly applies only to the sale of goods and not real estate, the Court found it necessary to adopt the UCC's principles for land auctions to ensure fairness and uniformity in the law. Under the UCC, if a bid is made while the hammer is falling, the auctioneer has the discretion to either reopen the bidding or declare the item sold. Since the trial court determined the higher bid occurred simultaneously with the hammer's fall, the auctioneer acted within his permitted discretion to reopen the sale to maximize the return.
Analysis:
This decision is significant because it bridges the gap between the law governing the sale of goods (UCC) and the common law governing real estate transactions. By borrowing the UCC standard for land auctions, the court prioritized the practical goal of auctions—obtaining the highest price—over the technical finality of the 'hammer fall.' It prevents an auctioneer's momentary oversight from invalidating a timely higher bid. This ruling provides clarity for future real estate auctions, giving auctioneers clear authority to correct timing errors to ensure the fairness of the sale.
