Chapman v. Armistead
Supreme Court of Virginia
THIS was an action of ejectment in the Haymarket Díst trict Court, in behalf of George Chapman against William Armistead, for seven hundred acres of land in Prince William County.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of ejectment in the Haymarket Díst trict Court, in behalf of George Chapman against William Armistead, for seven hundred acres of land in Prince William County. The declaration having-been served in May, 1806, and issue joined in October following, on the plea of not guilty; the defendant, on the 2d of November, 1808, filed an affidavit, stating-, that his counsel had filed that plea by mistake ; that in fact, he had no interest in the premises, either in possession or reversion, “ for that his mother, Lucy Armistead, holds the said lands as part of the dower to which she…
1Opinion of the Court
The president pronounced the court’s opinion.
This case, though very elaborately argued by counsel, on both sides, lies within a narrow compass. The two important questions to be decided are, first, what is the nature of the possession of the mortgagor, in relation to the mortgagee 5 and, secondly, what will be the effect of a judgment *396for the plaintiff upon the rights of the defendants George and Lucy Armistead. ?
Upon the first point, it was contended by the counsel for the appellant, that the case is essentially analogous to the case of Duval v. Bibb, (3 Call 362,) in which it was decided…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Smith v. GayleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Tapscott v. CobbsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1854
- Hukill v. GuffeyWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1892
- Walker v. Miller & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1847
- Grimes v. WilsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1837
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.