Rust v. Ware

Supreme Court of Virginia

Rust v. Ware

6 Va. 50

DecidedApril 15, 1849

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Va. 50 (Rust v. Ware) 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

Rust v. Ware, 6 Va. 50 (Va. 1849).

Pincite

Opinion

Allen, J.

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The Court is of opinion that the case made by the pleadings, proofs and admissions of the answer, shewed a mistake and miscalculation on the part of the jury, which, if discovered in time, would have furnished good ground for a new trial; and such mistake and the after discovered testimony entitled the appellants to relief in equity; and the Circuit court, instead of dissolving the injunction and dismissing the bill with costs, should have overruled the motion to dissolve, and referred the cause to a commissioner to ascertain the real amount due to the appellee; permitting the judgments to stand as a security for the sum ascertained to be actually due. And the Court is therefore of opinion, that said decree was erroneous, and the same is reversed with costs to the appellants, and the injunction is reinstated and the cause remanded with instructions to direct an account to ascertain the true amount which the appellee was entitled to recover; and for further proceedings in order to a final decree.

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

Allen, J.

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The Court is of opinion that the case made by the pleadings, proofs and admissions of the answer, shewed a mistake and miscalculation on the part of the jury, which, if discovered in time, would have furnished good ground for a new trial; and such mistake and the after discovered testimony entitled the appellants to relief in equity; and the Circuit court, instead of dissolving the injunction and dismissing the bill with costs, should have overruled the motion to dissolve, and referred the cause to a commissioner to ascertain the real amount due to the appellee; permitting the judgments to stand as a security for the sum ascertained to be actually due. And the Court is therefore of opinion, that said decree was erroneous, and the same is reversed with costs to the appellants, and the injunction is reinstated and the cause remanded with instructions to direct an account to ascertain the true amount which the appellee was entitled to recover; and for further proceedings in order to a final decree.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Va. 50, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rust-v-ware-va-1849.