Bradley Salt Co. v. Norfolk Importing & Exporting Co.
Supreme Court of Virginia
Error to a judgment of the Court of Law and Chancery of the city of Norfolk, rendered November 27, 1895, in an action of covenant on an instrument alleged to be under seal, whereof profert was made in the declaration, in which action the plaintiff in error was the plaintiff, and the defendant in error was the defendant.
1Opinion of the CourtBuchanan, J.
The plaintiff in error instituted an action of covenant upon an agreement in writing for the sale and purchase of salt. The *462defendant demurred -to the declaration upon the ground that the writing sued on was not a sealed instrument. The court sustained the demurrer, and to that judgment this writ of error was awarded.
The corporate seal of each of the parties, as appears from the record, was affixed to the writing, but there is no recognition of the seals in the body of the instrument. If the seals affixed had been scrolls by way of seals, the writing would not be a specialty, for it is well…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Ah Lim v. Territory of WashingtonWashington Supreme Court · 1890
- Sayward v. CarlsonWashington Supreme Court · 1890
- Grubbs v. National Life Maturity InsuranceSupreme Court of Virginia · 1897
- Dinwiddie County v. Stuart, Buchanan & Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1877
- Yarborough v. . MondaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1832
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Dinwiddie County v. Stuart, Buchanan & Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1877
- Transbel Investment Co. v. VenetosNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
- County School Board v. M. L. Whitlow, Inc.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1982
- Slaughter v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1856
- Ward v. ChurnSupreme Court of Virginia · 1868
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.