Norvell v. Camm
Supreme Court of Virginia
AFTER the decision in favour of ~arnm ai~d Wife and Warwick and Wife, in Ejectment against J~Por~e1l, reported in 2 J1ni~ 257-263, the latter brought a Writ of Right against the tormer for the same land.
Read the full summary
AFTER the decision in favour of ~arnm ai~d Wife and Warwick and Wife, in Ejectment against J~Por~e1l, reported in 2 J1ni~ 257-263, the latter brought a Writ of Right against the tormer for the same land. At the trial, the title-papers on botn sides being exhibited, the tenants lnovC(l the Court to instruct the Jury, that the patent of the demandant was ~void, on the ground that the land thereby granted was not waste and unappropmated, and consequently not liable to be taken up by a treasury warrant; which instruction was accordingly given by the Court, and thereupon a verdict was found and j…
1Opinion of the Court
The Court’s opinion was delivered by Judge Roane, as follows:
This is a writ of right brought by the appellant against the appellees; the female appellees claiming as heirs of Thomas Powell deceased. The mise being joined on the mere right, and the case submitted to a Jury, an exception was taken to an opinion of the Court. The bill of exceptions states that, at the trial, the tenants exhibited, in evidence to the jury, 1st, a patent of 10 September 1755, to James and John Christian and William Brown, for 3926 acres of land; which is set out; 2dly, a judgment of the General Court, of the 29th…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Nathan E. Hooper, Louisa J. Hooper, and Amanda E. Hooper, Minors, by Absalom Fowler, Their Next Friend, in Error v. Jacob ScheimerSupreme Court of the United States · 1860
- Aigeltinger Co. v. Healy-Tibbitts Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1913
- Morehouse Lumber & Building Material Co. v. Jacob & WalkerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1933
- Warwick v. NorvellSupreme Court of Virginia · 1842
- Sperry v. GibsonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1869
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.