Taylor v. Armstead

Court of Appeals of Virginia

Taylor v. Armstead

3 Va. 171

DecidedMay 7, 1802

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Va. 171 (Taylor v. Armstead) 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

Taylor v. Armstead, 3 Va. 171 (Va. Ct. App. 1802).

Pincite

Opinion

LYONS, Judge,

delivered the resolution of the Court, to the following effect:

That, as to the first point relative to the demand and refusal, there was no room for exception upon that ground; because the defendant, by appearing and contesting the claim, had rendered it unnecessary that further proof, with -regard thereto, should be stated in the record. But, with [173]*173respect to tlie second point, relative to the damages, the Court was clearly of opinion that the judgment, was erroneous; for, the .15 percent, damages are not given against an attorney by tlie act of Assembly, which merely relates to the notice and mode of conducting the cause, but does not create a penally. That, therefore, the judgment of the District Court was to he reversed, and judgment entered fbr the debt only.

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

LYONS, Judge,

delivered the resolution of the Court, to the following effect:

That, as to the first point relative to the demand and refusal, there was no room for exception upon that ground; because the defendant, by appearing and contesting the claim, had rendered it unnecessary that further proof, with -regard thereto, should be stated in the record. But, with [173]*173respect to tlie second point, relative to the damages, the Court was clearly of opinion that the judgment, was erroneous; for, the .15 percent, damages are not given against an attorney by tlie act of Assembly, which merely relates to the notice and mode of conducting the cause, but does not create a penally. That, therefore, the judgment of the District Court was to he reversed, and judgment entered fbr the debt only.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Va. 171, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-armstead-vactapp-1802.