L. J. Upton & Co. v. Reeve
Supreme Court of Virginia
Error to a judgment, of the Court of Law and Chancery of city of Norfolk, in an action of assumpsit. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant assigns error. '
1Opinion of the Court
SlMS, J.,
after making the foregoing statement, delivered the following opinion of the court:
No authorities are cited either for plaintiff or defendant.
1. Of course, the condition of the onion sets at Chicago at the time of their shipment was in issue in the case before us, and not their condition at Norfolk, save in so far as the latter was proper evidence of their prior condition at Chicago. Further:
It will be observed, from a consideration of the statement preceding this opinion, that the evidence in the case bears upon two aspects of the condition Of the onion sets on their arrival at…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Wessells v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1935
- Tate v. ChumbleySupreme Court of Virginia · 1950
- Newbern v. Joseph Baker & Co.Court of Appeals of Virginia · 1926
- Hughes v. DiehlCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1949
- Wessells v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1935