Ankaitis v. Merchants Firestone Tire Center

11 Va. Cir. 398, 1975 Va. Cir. LEXIS 17
CourtArlington County Circuit Court
DecidedMarch 10, 1975
DocketCase No. (Law) 17048
StatusPublished

This text of 11 Va. Cir. 398 (Ankaitis v. Merchants Firestone Tire Center) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arlington County Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ankaitis v. Merchants Firestone Tire Center, 11 Va. Cir. 398, 1975 Va. Cir. LEXIS 17 (Va. Super. Ct. 1975).

Opinion

By JUDGE CHARLES H. DUFF

It seems to me that the Plea in Abatement filed in this case is controlled by Sec. 8-97, Code of Virginia, 1950 and the opinions of Jacobson v. Southern Biscuit Co., 198 Va. 813 (1957), and Baldwin v. Norton Hotel, 163 Va. 76 (1934).

The name "Merchants Firestone Tire Center" is represented as a fictitious trade name for "Merchant’s Incorporated." I assume there is no genuine dispute as to the address of the business being 1503 Lee Highway, Arlington, Virginia, or that W. Catón Merchant, Jr., upon whom service by posting was perfected, is the Registered Agent of Merchant’s Inc. Under such circumstances I am of the opinion that the latter corporation should be substituted for the name appearing in the caption of the Motion for Judgment. The comment of the Supreme Court in Jacobson is apropos:

If the right party is before the court although under a wrong name, an amendment to cure a misnomer will be allowed, notwithstanding the running of the statute of limitations, provided there is no change in the cause of action originally stated. 39 Am. Jur., Parties, Sec. 124, pp. 1002-3; Anno., 124 A.L.R.-86, 124, 136; and see p. 128, where it is stated that possibly [399]*399upon the theory that a trade name is really the name of the person using it, amendments to give the real name, whether individual or corporation, had been allowed in the cases where cited.

In the event the parties cannot stipulate that the service on Mr. Merchant was as Registered Agent of the defendant, plaintiff should secure further service upon him in that capacity.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jacobson v. Southern Biscuit Co.
97 S.E.2d 1 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1957)
Baldwin v. Norton Hotel, Inc.
175 S.E. 751 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
11 Va. Cir. 398, 1975 Va. Cir. LEXIS 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ankaitis-v-merchants-firestone-tire-center-vaccarlington-1975.