Baker v. Glass

Supreme Court of Virginia

Baker v. Glass

6 Va. 212

DecidedNovember 2, 1818

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Va. 212 (Baker v. Glass) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Baker v. Glass, 6 Va. 212 (Va. 1818).

Pincite

Opinion

November 2nd 1818, Judge Roane pronounced the Court’s opinion, as follows:

Upon general principles, and on the authority of the cage Milnes v. Gery, 14 Vesey jr. 400, the Court is of opinion that there was, in this case, no such complete and concluded contract as the Court of Chancery ought to execute. The Decree is therefore to be reversed with costs, and the Bijl dismissed.

Jit the next term, a motion Avas made for another argument of the causey but the Court overruled the motion, doubting, at least, it’s riofii to re-hear a causo ata subS( sequent term, and thinking it best not to do it.”

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

November 2nd 1818, Judge Roane pronounced the Court’s opinion, as follows:

Upon general principles, and on the authority of the cage Milnes v. Gery, 14 Vesey jr. 400, the Court is of opinion that there was, in this case, no such complete and concluded contract as the Court of Chancery ought to execute. The Decree is therefore to be reversed with costs, and the Bijl dismissed.

Jit the next term, a motion Avas made for another argument of the causey but the Court overruled the motion, doubting, at least, it’s riofii to re-hear a causo ata subS( sequent term, and thinking it best not to do it.”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Va. 212, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baker-v-glass-va-1818.