Legal Opinion

Wessel v. Bargamin

Supreme Court of Virginia

Decided November 15, 1923PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Sims, J.,

after making the foregoing statement, delivered the following opinion of the court:

The questions presented for decision by the assignments of error will be disposed of in their order as stated below.

1. Was the notice of motion (together with the account which is made a part thereof), sufficient to maintain the action? That is, did it “state a case” —i. e., a cause of action, upon which the plaintiff was entitled to recover a judgment for some amount against the defendants?

The question must be answered in the affirmative.

The decisions in this jurisdiction upon the subject of what a…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Union Central Life Ins. v. PollardSupreme Court of Virginia · 1896
  2. Rinehart v. PirkeySupreme Court of Virginia · 1919
  3. Matthews v. LaPradeSupreme Court of Virginia · 1921
  4. Bardach Iron & Steel Co. v. TenenbaumSupreme Court of Virginia · 1923
  5. Security Loan & Trust Co. v. FieldsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1910

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Mountain State Water Co. v. Town of KingwoodWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Chappell v. SmithSupreme Court of Virginia · 1967
  3. Home Beneficial Ass'n v. ClarkSupreme Court of Virginia · 1929
  4. City of Portsmouth v. MadreySupreme Court of Virginia · 1937
  5. Curtis v. PeeblesSupreme Court of Virginia · 1934

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API