Turnbull v. Mann

Supreme Court of Virginia

Turnbull v. Mann

26 S.E. 510, 94 Va. 182, 1897 Va. LEXIS 59

Supreme Court of Virginia·Decided January 7, 1897·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

' Harrison, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

[183] The court is of opinion that the purpose of section 2198 of the Code was to afford a summary remedy for having the liens mentioned therein marked satisfied, where that duty has been neglected or for any cause has not been performed, upon proof that the debt has been actually paid or discharged, and was not intended to enable persons to have such liens marked satisfied because liable to be defeated by presumption of payment, or because barred by the statute of limitations.

The judgment of the lower court must, therefore, be reversed, and the motion dismissed without prejudice to the rights of either party thereto.

Reversed.

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

' Harrison, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

[183] The court is of opinion that the purpose of section 2198 of the Code was to afford a summary remedy for having the liens mentioned therein marked satisfied, where that duty has been neglected or for any cause has not been performed, upon proof that the debt has been actually paid or discharged, and was not intended to enable persons to have such liens marked satisfied because liable to be defeated by presumption of payment, or because barred by the statute of limitations.

The judgment of the lower court must, therefore, be reversed, and the motion dismissed without prejudice to the rights of either party thereto.

Reversed.

Turnbull v. Mann, 26 S.E. 510, 94 Va. 182, 1897 Va. LEXIS 59 (Va. 1897).

Pincite

26 S.E. 510 (Turnbull v. Mann) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related