Legal Opinion

Nottingham v. Ackiss

Supreme Court of Virginia

Decided March 10, 1910Published

Error to a judgment of the Law and Chancery Court of the city of Norfolk. Judgment for the plaintiff. Defendant as-signs error.

1Opinion of the CourtCardwell, J.

As the record of this case appeared when before this court on a former occasion (107 Va. 63, 57 S. E. 592), defendant in error, as the assignee of one C. F. Hodgman, brought his action of debt on a negotiable note for $790, payable, as appeared on its face, on demand and past due, without mating any reference whatever in his declaration to a written agreement introduced in evidence at the trial, made and signed by the parties to the transaction at the same time the note was executed by the drawers, the agreement being made a part and parcel of the note, to which it was attached, and set forth…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Nottingham v. AckissSupreme Court of Virginia · 1907

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

Powered by the Exa API