Ware Creek Real Estate Corp. has found itself embroiled in a legal battle over a real estate commission dispute, with the court’s decision potentially impacting future dealings involving rights of first refusal in property sales. On November 25, 2025, Ware Creek Real Estate Corp., a Virginia corporation, filed an appeal against Dandridge K. Davis and Jonathan B. Keyser, co-executors of the estate of Ann B. Darst, as well as the City of Williamsburg, following an unfavorable ruling by the Circuit Court for the City of Williamsburg and County of James City.
The origins of this case date back to September 2021 when Ann B. Darst decided to sell her home and an extensive property in Williamsburg, Virginia. The City held a right of first refusal on this property, which complicated matters when Darst attempted to sell it for $973,750—a price not accepted by the City. Eventually, George and Susan Valashinas expressed interest in purchasing the property for $1 million after being introduced to it by Walker Ware from Ware Creek Real Estate Corp. Despite signing a contract with the Valashinases on October 7, 2021, acknowledging the City’s right of first refusal, complications arose when the City chose to exercise its right on October 14.
Ware Creek’s involvement stemmed from its expectation of receiving a commission from this transaction—a belief based on provisions within the signed Offer to Purchase that directed payment of a six percent commission at closing. However, disputes over this entitlement led to further legal complexities. When Darst and the City reached an agreement (the Escrow Agreement) to deposit $60,000—representing Ware Creek’s disputed commission—with escrow agent David Otey Jr., Ware Creek pursued legal action against all parties involved.
On November 29, 2023, Ware Creek filed lawsuits alleging breach of contract against both Darst and the City while also targeting Otey in his role as escrow agent. However, during proceedings on March 19, 2024, the circuit court dismissed Ware Creek’s claims against both Darst and the City regarding third-party beneficiary status under these agreements but allowed part of their claim concerning breach related to the Offer to Purchase.
Despite these setbacks at trial on October 22, 2024—wherein judgment favored Darst due largely due to lack evidence supporting any enforceable obligation—the appellate court reviewed whether errors were made during initial rulings around demurrers or conditions precedent like those tied up within rights-of-first-refusal clauses governing such sales transactions involving multiple stakeholders including municipalities holding unique privileges akin thereto!
Ultimately seeking reversal alongside remandment aimed rectifying perceived injustices suffered amidst ongoing litigation; plaintiffs remain steadfastly committed toward securing favorable outcomes potentially altering landscape surrounding real estate law interpretations across broader contexts beyond mere contractual obligations alone!
Representing Ware Creek are attorneys Bruce E. Arkema and Matthew B. Arkema from Durrette Arkema Gerson & Gill while Lynn K Brugh IV represents defendants Dandridge K Davis Jonathan B Keyser co-executors estate late Ms Ann B Darst through Williams Mullen firm respectively presided over Honorable Judge Steven C Frucci Record No:2128-24-1
Source: 2128241_Ware_Creek_Real_Estate_Corp_v_Davis_Opinion_Virginia_Court_of_Appeals.pdf
