Riggs National Bank v. Granville-Smith

Fairfax County Circuit Court

Riggs National Bank v. Granville-Smith

17 Va. Cir. 202, 1989 Va. Cir. LEXIS 224

CourtFairfax County Circuit Court

DecidedJuly 3, 1989

DocketCase No. (Law) 89472

StatusPublished

This text of 17 Va. Cir. 202 (Riggs National Bank v. Granville-Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Fairfax County Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Riggs National Bank v. Granville-Smith, 17 Va. Cir. 202, 1989 Va. Cir. LEXIS 224 (Va. Super. Ct. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

By JUDGE JOHANNA L. FITZPATRICK

This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Renewed Motion to Quash Service of Process. For the following reasons, the Motion is granted.

This Court previously denied Defendants’ Motion to Quash on the basis of a notary acknowledgment taken in the State of Virginia, County of Loudoun. Upon review of the affidavits submitted by defendants and of other new evidence submitted as to the invalidity of such notary acknowledgment, this Court finds there have been insufficient contacts with the State of Virginia to establish the "transaction of business" in Virginia for purposes of the long-arm statute provisions of § 8.01-328.1(A)(1). There is no evidence the Defendant has ever been to Virginia nor entered into any contract here nor performed any service or received the benefit of any services here. The extent of her contact with the subject transaction was to execute documents sent to her in Florida. Such activity does not establish the transaction of business in Virginia.

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

By JUDGE JOHANNA L. FITZPATRICK

This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Renewed Motion to Quash Service of Process. For the following reasons, the Motion is granted.

This Court previously denied Defendants’ Motion to Quash on the basis of a notary acknowledgment taken in the State of Virginia, County of Loudoun. Upon review of the affidavits submitted by defendants and of other new evidence submitted as to the invalidity of such notary acknowledgment, this Court finds there have been insufficient contacts with the State of Virginia to establish the "transaction of business" in Virginia for purposes of the long-arm statute provisions of § 8.01-328.1(A)(1). There is no evidence the Defendant has ever been to Virginia nor entered into any contract here nor performed any service or received the benefit of any services here. The extent of her contact with the subject transaction was to execute documents sent to her in Florida. Such activity does not establish the transaction of business in Virginia.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 Va. Cir. 202, 1989 Va. Cir. LEXIS 224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/riggs-national-bank-v-granville-smith-vaccfairfax-1989.