Upton & Walker v. R. D. Holloway & Co.
Supreme Court of Virginia
Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of city of Newport News, in an action of assumpsit. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiffs assign error. Upton & Walker brought an action of assumpsit against R. D. Holloway, doing business under the style of R. D. Holloway & Co., and there was a judgment for the defendant to which this writ of error was awarded. The parties occupy the same relation to each other in this court that they occupied in the trial court.
Read the full summary
Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of city of Newport News, in an action of assumpsit. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiffs assign error. Upton & Walker brought an action of assumpsit against R. D. Holloway, doing business under the style of R. D. Holloway & Co., and there was a judgment for the defendant to which this writ of error was awarded. The parties occupy the same relation to each other in this court that they occupied in the trial court. The United States government, in November, 1917, called for bids for large quantities of oats and bran for the embarkation camp at Newport…
1Opinion of the CourtBurks, J.
(after making the foregoing statement) delivered the opinion of the court.
[1] The evidence on the subject of fraud in the procurement of the contract being conflicting, the finding of the jury on that subject is final and conclusive, and even if the case had to be reversed on other grounds, this finding would not be disturbebd under the provisions of section 6365 of the new Code. But that finding is not assigned as error in. the petition for writ of error, and will be accepted as correct in the further consideration of the case. The only errors assigned are the giving to the jury, at the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wilson v. Carpenter's Adm'rSupreme Court of Virginia · 1895
- Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. StockSupreme Court of Virginia · 1905
- Montague's Adm'r v. MasseySupreme Court of Virginia · 1882
- Trotter v. E. I. Dupont de Nemours & Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1919
3Cited by1 opinion
- Meuse v. HenrySupreme Court of Virginia · 2018