Noel v. Sale

5 Va. 431
Court of Appeals of Virginia·Decided April 27, 1790·Published

Opinion

PENDLETON, President.

May there not have been a cause dehors the record ?

Marshall. If so, it ought to have been stated.

Cur. adv. vulL

LYONS, Judge.

Delivered the resolution of the Court, that the judgment of the District Court should be affirmed. That Noel should either have moved for a second inquisition, or filed a bill of exceptions to the Court’s opinion, in order that it might have appeared upon what ground the Court proceeded.

ROANE, Judge.

I suspect that the Courts below proceeded upon the ground, that the inquisition was taken by the deputy Sheriff; but that has been decided to be good [432] by this Court.

Footnotes

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

Noel v. Sale, 5 Va. 431 (Va. Ct. App. 1790).

5 Va. 431 (Noel v. Sale) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stowe v. State
25 P. 1085 (Washington Supreme Court, 1891)