Legal Opinion
Metz v. Tusico, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Virginia
Decided January 27, 1958No. Civ. No. 1395PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ALBERT V. BRYAN, District Judge.
Sued upon here is a covenant, which was included in a contract for the sale of land in Fairfax County, Virginia from the appellee to the appellant, in these words: “The seller herein warrants that water is available to the property along state route 626, or rear of the subject property.” The case now comes on upon the remittitur of the Court of Appeals vacating this court’s dismissal of the action and remanding it for further findings. Metz v. Tusico, Inc., 4 Cir., 1957, 246 F.2d 54. With additional evidence adduced by the parties at the second trial, specific…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Click v. Green & SadlerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1883
- Williams v. SniderSupreme Court of Virginia · 1949
- Spruill v. ShirleySupreme Court of Virginia · 1944
- Nathan Metz v. Tusico, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1957
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rural Water District No. 1, Ellsworth County, Kansas v. City Of Wilson, KansasCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2001
- Seldeen v. CanbyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1970
- Rural Water District No. 1 v. City of WilsonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2001
- Southern Black Hills Water System, Inc. v. Town of HermosaDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2023