Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Parrish v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n

Supreme Court of Virginia

Decided June 16, 2016No. Record 150454Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice McCLANAHAN

While I agree with the majority that the circuit court did not err in considering the pleadings filed in the general district court, I disagree with the majority's conclusion that the general district court was divested of subject matter jurisdiction to try the unlawful detainer action. Furthermore, because the Parrishes' allegations of a breach of the deed of trust, even if true, would not entitle the Parrishes to possession of the property in an unlawful detainer action, I would affirm the judgment of the circuit court.

A. Subject Matter Jurisdiction

In a result-oriented approach, the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Hackley v. RobeySupreme Court of Virginia · 1938
  2. UNIWEST CONST. v. Amtech Elevator ServicesSupreme Court of Virginia · 2010
  3. Whitlow v. Mountain Trust BankSupreme Court of Virginia · 1974
  4. Harrison & Wife v. MansonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1898
  5. Wohlford v. WohlfordCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1917

6 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