Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

5 Munf. 21

Dow v. Adam's Administrators

Supreme Court of Virginia

Decided January 27, 1816

Supreme Court of Virginia · decided 1816-01-27

William Wilson and William Herbert, surviving administrators of Robert Adam deceased, brought their action for covenant broken against Janet Dow, assignee of Peter Dow, in the Superior Court of law of Loudoun county.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1816-01-27

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently July 1897

4 state decisions

10181618201830184018501860187018801890decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Judge Roane

¶1pronounced the court’s opinion, with an observation of his own subjoined, as follows:-

*23“ The court is of opinion, that although interest ought not “ to be given, as of course, in actions for the recovery of rent “ in arrear, it may nevertheless be given under circumstances to “ be judged of by the jury; and that, in case of a general ver- “ diet allowing interest, it shall be intended that sufficient cir- “ cumstances existed to justify the allowance thereof. — The “ court is further of opinion that the circumstances stated to the “ court in this case by the jury are not sufficient to justify the ,c verdict, so far as it allows interest; and that, therefore, the “ appellee should only recover the principal sum found by the “jury- The Judgment is therefore to be reversed, and en- “ tered for the principal sum. I will take the liberty to add, i! (speaking for myself only,) that, while I concur in the above “ judgment in every other point, I doubt, as at present advis51 ed, whether the sufficiency of these circumstances, to justify “ a refusal of the interest, ought not to be left to the jury in ex- “ elusion of the power of the court, under the spirit of the deeis5 sion of this court in the case of W'Call v. Turner.” (a)

¶21 Call 133.

/5/munf/21 · .json · Public domain