Oliver Refining Co. v. Portsmouth Cotton Oil Refining Corp.
Supreme Court of Virginia
Error to a judgment of the Oourt of Law. and Chancery of the city of Norfolk in an action of assumpsit. Judgment for the plaintiff, a part of which was remitted under protest. Both plaintiff and defendant assign error.
1Opinion of the CourtBuchanan, J.
An action of assumpsit was brought by the Portsmouth Cotton Oil Refining Corporation against the Oliver Refining *515Company. There was a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, a motion to set it aside, which was sustained upon the ground that the damages were excessive; and the trial court ordered that the verdict should be set aside and a new trial granted unless the plaintiff would remit all of its recovery except a named sum. The plaintiff remitted under protest, and a judgment was rendered for the reduced amount. To that judgment each party applied for and obtained a writ of error.
There was a…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Shenandoah Valley R. R. v. DunlopSupreme Court of Virginia · 1889
- Disbrow v. . HarrisNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- National Bank v. NoltingSupreme Court of Virginia · 1897
- Johnson v. MooreMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
- Torrence v. SheddIllinois Supreme Court · 1884
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- City of Norfolk v. Norfolk CountySupreme Court of Virginia · 1917
- Countryside Orthopaedics, P.C. v. PeytonSupreme Court of Virginia · 2001
- Vermont Marble Co. v. EastmanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1917
- Whitemaine v. AniskovichNevada Supreme Court · 2008
- Texas Co. v. NorthupSupreme Court of Virginia · 1930
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.