Witz, Biedler & Co. v. Fite
Supreme Court of Virginia
Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Orange county, rendered October 2, 1892, in an action of debt, wherein the plaintiffs in error were the plaintiffs, and the defendants in error were the defendants. This was an action of debt on two notes.
Read the full summary
Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Orange county, rendered October 2, 1892, in an action of debt, wherein the plaintiffs in error were the plaintiffs, and the defendants in error were the defendants. This was an action of debt on two notes. The defendants pleaded payment, and also tendered two special pleas, which were received by the court over the objection of the plaintiffs; thereupon the plaintiffs replied specially to each of said special pleas, and the defendants demurred to each of said special replications, which demurrer the court sustained, and entered up judgment for.the…
1Opinion of the CourtBuchanan, J.
This is a writ of error to a judgment of the Circuit Court for Orange county, rendered in an action of debt brought upon two promissory notes executed by M. FI. Fite, S. L. Fite and Julia A. Levins, the defendants in error, to Witz, Biedler & Co., the plaintiffs in error. The defendants filed two special pleas in writing. The defence set up in plea Flo. 1 is that M. M. Fite and S. L. Fite, two of the three makers of the notes sued on, after such notes became due and payable, executed two writings under seal, payable to the plaintiffs, for the identical debts mentioned in the declaration,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Butler v. MillerCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
- Graves v. AllenTexas Supreme Court · 1886
- Wallace v. FairmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
3Cited by5 opinions
- Peterson v. NelsonMontana Supreme Court · 1926
- Archer v. WardSupreme Court of Virginia · 1853
- Lee v. TapscottCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1796
- Lee v. TapscottCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1796
- Lee v. TapscottCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1796