Wasserman v. Metzger
Supreme Court of Virginia
■Appeal from a decree of the Court of Law and Chancery of the city of Korfolk. Decree in favor of complainant. Two of the defendants appeal.
1DissentCardwell, J.
(dissenting) :
I am constrained to adhere to a view of this case entirely opposed to that taken by the majority of the court, and shall review the cases presented in the petition for the appeal and as argued by counsel here.
The case was formerly before this court, at which time the court, without passing upon the merits of the case, decided that the court below should have directed the complainant to amend her bill so as to make The National Bank of Commerce a party defendant. 102 Va. 837, 47 S. E. 820. When the case went back the bill was so amended and the bank made a party. It answered,…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Fletcher v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
- Williams v. JacksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Wilson v. WallSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Sulphur Mines Co. v. Thompson's HeirsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1896
- Hamilton v. LubukeeIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.