Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

4 Munf. 120

Daniel v. Morton

Supreme Court of Virginia

Decided January 8, 1814

Supreme Court of Virginia · decided 1814-01-08

The declaration in this case, being uncommon, is here “ Cumberland County, to wit;— u William L. Morton surviving partner of Quin is’ William L. Morton complains of John Daniel, in custody, See. of a plea, for this, to wit, that, whereas a certain Samuel Price, in his lifetime, to wit, on the 15th day of May 1799, at the parish of —-in the county aforesaid, was indebted to the said Quin is’ William L. Morton in the sum of 45/. 5s. 9d., with interest from the day and year…

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1852

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1814-01-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1The following was delivered by Judge Roane as the opinion of the court.

¶2“The court (not deciding upon any other question occurring in this cause,) is of opinion that the declaration is defective in this, that there is no averment therein that the appellee did relinquish his pretension to administer on the estate of Satnuel Price, deceased, pursuant to the agreement therein stated, and because, for any thing in the said declaration averred, the said appellee may not have relinquished; but, on the contrary, the administration on said estate may have been granted to the appellant, on the decision of a motion, which may have been contested by the appellee notwithstanding the agreement aforesaid ; so that, if a recovery were had upon this declaration, it might be, for aught averred therein, wholly without consideration. On this ground, the judgment is reversed with costs, and judgment entered for the defendant.”

/4/munf/120 · .json · Public domain