Farley v. Tillar
Supreme Court of Virginia
Error to judgment of circuit court of Greenesville, rendered April 29, 1884, affirming judgment of county court of said county, rendered January 10, 1884, in an action of unlawful detainer, wherein B. D. Tillar was plaintiff, and Mrs. Kate T. Farley and her husband, P. R. Farley, were defendants.
Read the full summary
Error to judgment of circuit court of Greenesville, rendered April 29, 1884, affirming judgment of county court of said county, rendered January 10, 1884, in an action of unlawful detainer, wherein B. D. Tillar was plaintiff, and Mrs. Kate T. Farley and her husband, P. R. Farley, were defendants. The object of the action was to recover possession of a hotel in Hicksford, which, it was alleged, Mrs. Farley had rented, as a sole trader, of the plaintiff, and unlawfully withheld. The verdict and judgment in the county court being for the plaintiff, the defendants took the case to the circuit…
1Opinion of the CourtLacy, J.
The case is as follows: In January, 1882, P. R. Farley and his wife, Mrs. Kate T. Farley, came to the town of Hicksford, in the county of Greenesville, to look at the hotel called the “Cato House,” the possession of which is the subject of this controversy, and which is the property of the defendant in error, B. D. Tillar. Upon inspection of the house, which was then somewhat out of repair, Tillar and Farley agreed upon a contract, by which Farley was to pay Tillar twenty-five dollars per month for one year, the house to be shortly repaired by the owner, and when the repairs commenced the…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Hoge & Hutchinson v. TurnerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1899
- Jones v. DeggeSupreme Court of Virginia · 1888
- Armstrong, Cator & Co. v. LachmanSupreme Court of Virginia · 1888
- N. &. W. R. R. v. PrindleSupreme Court of Virginia · 1886
- Groety v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1923
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.