Mayo v. Clark

2 Va. 276
CourtCourt of Appeals of Virginia
DecidedApril 15, 1800
StatusPublished

This text of 2 Va. 276 (Mayo v. Clark) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mayo v. Clark, 2 Va. 276 (Va. Ct. App. 1800).

Opinion

LYONS, Judge,

informed him, that the court was of opinion that a mandamus was not a proper remedy. That they did not pretend to prescribe what mode he should pursue; because it was sufficient *for them to say that his present application was improper. . Whereupon, Randolph moved for, and obtained a writ of supersedeas.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 Va. 276, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayo-v-clark-vactapp-1800.