Hobson v. Hobson

Supreme Court of Virginia

Hobson v. Hobson

40 S.E. 899, 100 Va. 216, 1902 Va. LEXIS 18

CourtSupreme Court of Virginia

DecidedMarch 12, 1902

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 40 S.E. 899 (Hobson v. Hobson) 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

Hobson v. Hobson, 40 S.E. 899, 100 Va. 216, 1902 Va. LEXIS 18 (Va. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

Buchanan, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an 'appeal from an order sustaining a demurrer to an amended hill filed 'ait rules, and dismissing the same upon the ground that it mates an entirely new case, inconsistent with and repugnant to the case stated in the original hill.

[217]*217The first- question to he considered is whether or not an appeal lies from such an order. If it does not, -although no objection was made at the hearing upon that ground, this court has no jurisdiction, and the appeal must be dismissed as imrprovidently awarded. Merchant, &c., v. Healy, 94 Va 614.

The general rule is that an appeal or writ of error does not lie from an interlocutory order, allowing or refusing amendments to the pleadings until there has been a final decree or judgment, except where the statute otherwise provides. See Gillespie v. Coleman, 98 Va. 27; Lancaster v. Lancaster, 86 Va. 201; Elder v. Harris, 75 Va. 68.

Our statute, section 3454 of the Code, provides that a party to a chancery cause in which there is a decree or order dissolving an injunction, or requiring money to be paid, or the possession or title of property to be -changed, or adjudicating the principles of the case, or in which there is a final decree or order, may present a petition for an appeal. The order appealed from is not a final decree. The original proceedings are still pending, may be revived against the representatives of the deceased parties, and proceeded with as if the amended bill had never been filed. It is not an order dissolving an injunction, or requiring money to be paid, or the possession or title of property to be changed; neither does it adjudicate the principles of the case. It is a mere refusal of the court to allow the pleadings to be amended in the manner attempted 'by the amended bill, and settles none of the questions involved in the original proceedings.

It is clearly not an appealable order. The appeal must therefore be dismissed as improvidently awarded.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Buchanan, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an 'appeal from an order sustaining a demurrer to an amended hill filed 'ait rules, and dismissing the same upon the ground that it mates an entirely new case, inconsistent with and repugnant to the case stated in the original hill.

[217]*217The first- question to he considered is whether or not an appeal lies from such an order. If it does not, -although no objection was made at the hearing upon that ground, this court has no jurisdiction, and the appeal must be dismissed as imrprovidently awarded. Merchant, &c., v. Healy, 94 Va 614.

The general rule is that an appeal or writ of error does not lie from an interlocutory order, allowing or refusing amendments to the pleadings until there has been a final decree or judgment, except where the statute otherwise provides. See Gillespie v. Coleman, 98 Va. 27; Lancaster v. Lancaster, 86 Va. 201; Elder v. Harris, 75 Va. 68.

Our statute, section 3454 of the Code, provides that a party to a chancery cause in which there is a decree or order dissolving an injunction, or requiring money to be paid, or the possession or title of property to be -changed, or adjudicating the principles of the case, or in which there is a final decree or order, may present a petition for an appeal. The order appealed from is not a final decree. The original proceedings are still pending, may be revived against the representatives of the deceased parties, and proceeded with as if the amended bill had never been filed. It is not an order dissolving an injunction, or requiring money to be paid, or the possession or title of property to be changed; neither does it adjudicate the principles of the case. It is a mere refusal of the court to allow the pleadings to be amended in the manner attempted 'by the amended bill, and settles none of the questions involved in the original proceedings.

It is clearly not an appealable order. The appeal must therefore be dismissed as improvidently awarded.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 S.E. 899, 100 Va. 216, 1902 Va. LEXIS 18, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hobson-v-hobson-va-1902.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack