Kent v. Armistead
4 Munf. 72, 18 Va. 72, 1813 Va. LEXIS 24
Opinion
The president pronounced the court’s opinion, “that, (without deciding either of the points stated in the bills of exceptions,) the declaration is insufficient to support the action ; it not being stated therein that the slave in question belonged to, or was the property of the plaintiff, now defendant.”
Judgment reversed, and entered in favour of the plaintiff in error.
Note. See 1 Chitty on pleading, 365 ; 3 Tuck. Bl. 152 Sound. 379. note 13.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kent v. Armistead, 4 Munf. 72, 18 Va. 72, 1813 Va. LEXIS 24 (Va. 1813).
4 Munf. 72 (Kent v. Armistead) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hunt's Adm'r v. Martin's Adm'r
8 Va. 578 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1852)
Dykes & Co. v. Woodhouse's Administrator
3 Va. 287 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1825)