Tang v. N. V. Homes, Inc.

17 Va. Cir. 57, 1989 Va. Cir. LEXIS 234
CourtFairfax County Circuit Court
DecidedJanuary 5, 1989
DocketCase No. (Law) 74005
StatusPublished

This text of 17 Va. Cir. 57 (Tang v. N. V. Homes, Inc.) 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
Tang v. N. V. Homes, Inc., 17 Va. Cir. 57, 1989 Va. Cir. LEXIS 234 (Va. Super. Ct. 1989).

Opinion

By JUDGE J. HOWE BROWN

The question before the Court is whether the Plaintiffs may amend their ad damnum to an amount in excess of the jurisdiction of the General District Court in a case which has been removed by the Defendant to the Circuit Court. I find that the amendment should be allowed and have entered the enclosed Order.

When a case is appealed from the General District Court after trial, the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court is derivative, and the jurisdictional amount of the lower court controls. Stacy v. Mullins, 185 Va. 837 (1946). This rationale does not apply to a case upon removal. See Hoffman v. Stuart, 188 Va. 785 (1949). When the Defendant chooses to remove the case to invoke the original jurisdiction of the Circuit Court, the Defendant exposes itself to the increased jurisdictional amount of this Court.

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

Related

Stacy v. Mullins
40 S.E.2d 265 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1946)
Hoffman v. Stuart
51 S.E.2d 239 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 Va. Cir. 57, 1989 Va. Cir. LEXIS 234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tang-v-n-v-homes-inc-vaccfairfax-1989.