Doe v. Craigen

Supreme Court of Virginia

Doe v. Craigen

8 Va. 449

DecidedAugust 15, 1836

StatusPublished

This text of 8 Va. 449 (Doe v. Craigen) 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

Doe v. Craigen, 8 Va. 449 (Va. 1836).

Pincite

Opinions

Carr, J.

In spite of the ingenious argument of the counsel for the plaintiff in error, I am of opinion, that according to the spirit and meaning of the law, and the clear and uniform course of our decisions, the estate given to Phoebe Couchman was a fee tail, changed by our act into a fee simple, and the devise over void.

Cabell, J.

I think the case a very plain one, and that the judgment ought to be affirmed.

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

Carr, J.

In spite of the ingenious argument of the counsel for the plaintiff in error, I am of opinion, that according to the spirit and meaning of the law, and the clear and uniform course of our decisions, the estate given to Phoebe Couchman was a fee tail, changed by our act into a fee simple, and the devise over void.

Cabell, J.

I think the case a very plain one, and that the judgment ought to be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 Va. 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doe-v-craigen-va-1836.

Opinions

I think the case a very plain one, and that the judgment ought to be affirmed.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack