Legal Opinion

M. M. Rowe Co. v. Wallerstein

Supreme Court of Virginia

Decided June 17, 1926PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.

This is a proceeding by notice of motion instituted by the defendant in error (hereinafter called plaintiff) against the plaintiff in error (hereinafter called defendant) to recover the sum of $500 alleged to be due by virtue of a contract in writing, the pertinent part of which is as follows:

“This deed of lease, made this 9th day of September, in the year 1922, between H..S. Wallerstein, by Schmidt, Wilson & Richardson, Inc., agents, party of the first part, and M. M. Rowe Company, Incorporated, party of the second part,

Witnesseth: “That the said party of the first part doth demise unto the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. McMillan v. SolomonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1868
  2. Womack v. McQuarryIndiana Supreme Court · 1867
  3. Richardson v. Planters Bank of FarmvilleSupreme Court of Virginia · 1896
  4. Snook & Austin Furniture Co. v. Steiner & EmerySupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
  5. White v. MolyneuxSupreme Court of Georgia · 1847

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Kanawha Banking & Trust Co. v. GilbertWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Ballsun v. Star Petroleum Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
  3. Jackson v. BirgfeldCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1948
  4. Halifax Engineering, Inc. v. Doyle, Inc.Virginia Circuit Court · 1991
  5. Greenaway v. JohnsonSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 1978

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API