Hamilton's Lessee v. Cawood & Blacklock

3 Md. 437
CourtGeneral Court of Virginia
DecidedMay 15, 1796
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 3 Md. 437 (Hamilton's Lessee v. Cawood & Blacklock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering General Court of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hamilton's Lessee v. Cawood & Blacklock, 3 Md. 437 (Va. Super. Ct. 1796).

Opinion

The Court

were of opinion that the party must be confined to his courses and distances, and that he cannot explain by parol testimony what land was intended to be conveyed.

The plaintiff suffered a nonsuit.

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

Related

Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission v. Cae-Link Corp.
622 A.2d 745 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 Md. 437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamiltons-lessee-v-cawood-blacklock-vagensess-1796.