Graham v. Hendren
This text of 5 Munf. 185 (Graham v. Hendren) 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.
Opinion
[187]*187Tuesday, October 28th, 1816
pronounced the ©om-t’s • i -nion ; that, upon the tes. ¡¡ron}', tiu was such a m¡í5imdt:n'anding between the parties, at the time of entering into the written contract in the proceedings contained, as to the ideniy of the land, to which that contract relates, that a Court of Equity ought not, in its discretion, to interfere by decreeing a specific performance. The Court is also of opinion that Jf alter Dunn ought to have been a party to the Appellee’s Bill; but, ns he whs not made a party by him, after his interest was fully disclosed by the answers; as, from the case, as it now appears, the Appellee has no right to a decree ag; iust him, if he were before us ; ami as, generally, the adding of other defendants is in favour of those who were originally con-vented ; the Üourt does not think it proper to retain the cause for the purpose of making Dunn a party. The decree is therefore reversed, with costs, and the Bill dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
5 Munf. 185, 5 Va. 185, 1816 Va. LEXIS 31, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/graham-v-hendren-va-1816.