Ragland v. Broadnax
Supreme Court of Virginia
In July, 1873, A. J. Broadnax, W. E. Broadnax and E. "W. Wilkins instituted a suit in the circuit court of the city of Richmond, against the Petersburg Railroad Company, Reuben Ragland, the Board of Public Works, and several other persons; and the City of Petersburg after-wards became a party defendant in the cause.
Read the full summary
In July, 1873, A. J. Broadnax, W. E. Broadnax and E. "W. Wilkins instituted a suit in the circuit court of the city of Richmond, against the Petersburg Railroad Company, Reuben Ragland, the Board of Public Works, and several other persons; and the City of Petersburg after-wards became a party defendant in the cause. The plaintiffs, in their bill, say they are the owners of four hundred and forty shares of the capital stock of tire Peters-burg Railroad Company, and they file the bill not only for themselves, hut for all other stockholders of the company, and such holders of tlie mortgage debt…
1Opinion of the CourtChristian, J.
The first question we have to determine in this case is a question of jurisdiction.
Rid the circuit court of the city of Richmond have the jurisdiction to hear and determine the matters set forth in the original bill ?
The circuit court of the city of Richmond is different from the other circuit courts of the state—a court of limited jurisdiction.
It has no chancery jurisdiction, (there being created by statute a separate chancery court for the city of Richmond), except “in suits in which it may be necessary or proper to make any of the following public officers a party defendant as representing…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mettert's adm'r v. HaganSupreme Court of Virginia · 1868
- Rhea v. JordanSupreme Court of Virginia · 1877
3Cited by2 opinions
- Davis v. MarrSupreme Court of Virginia · 1959
- City of Richmond City Council v. WilderRichmond County Circuit Court · 2007