record for every conceivable error (Virginia) · Go Syfert
← Virginia issues

record for every conceivable error in Virginia

12 Virginia opinions name it 2 courts 1907–2023 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Virginia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (9)

CaseFollowedCited
First National Bank v. William R. Trigg Co.green
va · 1907 · cited in 5 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 1942–2014
2 sentences

2014Such specificity adequately puts the court and opposing counsel on notice as to “what points [appellant]’s counsel intends to ask a reversal of the judgment or decree” and prevents them from having to “hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed.” First Nat’l Bank of Richmond, 106 Va. at 341 , 56 S.E. at 163 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

2014Such specificity adequately puts the court and opposing counsel on notice as to “what points [appellant]’s counsel intends to ask a reversal of the judgment or decree” and prevents them from having to “hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed.” First Nat’l Bank of Richmond, 106 Va. at 341 , 56 S.E. at 163 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

35
Clements v. Hearnegreen
tex · 1876 · cited in 8 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 1907–2014
2 sentences

2014Yeatts v. Murray, 249 Va. 285, 290 , 455 S.E.2d 18, 21 (1995). 28 “To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed, when none has been pointed out by the party complaining of the judgment, would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business; and, by the confusion and uncertainty which it would beget as to the questions on which the case was decided in the court below, destroy its character as an

2009In Puckett v. Commonwealth, 134 Va. 574, 579-80 , 113 S.E. 853, 854 (1922), the then Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals quoted from Clements v. Hearne, 45 Tex. 415 (1876), as follows: “ ‘To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed ... would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business....’” See also Nicholas *204 v. Harnsberger, 180 Va. 203, 208 , 22 S.E.2d 23, 25 (1942); Fitzgerald v. Bass,

18
Puckett v. Commonwealthgreen
va · 1922 · cited in 3 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 1933–2009
2 sentences

2009In Puckett v. Commonwealth, 134 Va. 574, 579-80 , 113 S.E. 853, 854 (1922), the then Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals quoted from Clements v. Hearne, 45 Tex. 415 (1876), as follows: “ ‘To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed ... would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business....’” See also Nicholas *204 v. Harnsberger, 180 Va. 203, 208 , 22 S.E.2d 23, 25 (1942); Fitzgerald v. Bass,

2009In Puckett v. Commonwealth, 134 Va. 574, 579-80 , 113 S.E. 853, 854 (1922), the then Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals quoted from Clements v. Hearne, 45 Tex. 415 (1876), as follows: “ ‘To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed ... would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business....’” See also Nicholas *204 v. Harnsberger, 180 Va. 203, 208 , 22 S.E.2d 23, 25 (1942); Fitzgerald v. Bass,

13
Loughran v. Kincheloegreen
va · 1933 · cited in 2 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 1942–2014
2 sentences

2014Consequently, it is the duty of an appellant’s counsel “to ‘lay his finger on the error’ in his [assignment of error],” Carroll v. Commonwealth, 280 Va. 641, 649 , 701 S.E.2d 414, 418 (2010) (quoting First Nat’l Bank, 106 Va. [at] 342, 56 S.E. [at] 163), and not to invite an appellate court “to delve into the record and winnow the chaff from the wheat.” Loughran v. Kincheloe, 160 Va. 292, 298 , 168 S.E. 362, 364 (1933).

2014Consequently, it is the duty of an appellant’s counsel “to ‘lay his finger on the error’ in his [assignment of error],” Carroll v. Commonwealth, 280 Va. 641, 649 , 701 S.E.2d 414, 418 (2010) (quoting First Nat’l Bank, 106 Va. [at] 342, 56 S.E. [at] 163), and not to invite an appellate court “to delve into the record and winnow the chaff from the wheat.” Loughran v. Kincheloe, 160 Va. 292, 298 , 168 S.E. 362, 364 (1933).

12
Yeatts v. Murraygreen
va · 1995 · cited in 1 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014Yeatts v. Murray, 249 Va. 285, 290 , 455 S.E.2d 18, 21 (1995). 28 “To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed, when none has been pointed out by the party complaining of the judgment, would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business; and, by the confusion and uncertainty which it would beget as to the questions on which the case was decided in the court below, destroy its character as an

2014Yeatts v. Murray, 249 Va. 285, 290 , 455 S.E.2d 18, 21 (1995). 28 “To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed, when none has been pointed out by the party complaining of the judgment, would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business; and, by the confusion and uncertainty which it would beget as to the questions on which the case was decided in the court below, destroy its character as an

11
Carroll v. Com.green
va · 2010 · cited in 1 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014Consequently, it is the duty of an appellant’s counsel “to ‘lay his finger on the error’ in his [assignment of error],” Carroll v. Commonwealth, 280 Va. 641, 649 , 701 S.E.2d 414, 418 (2010) (quoting First Nat’l Bank, 106 Va. [at] 342, 56 S.E. [at] 163), and not to invite an appellate court “to delve into the record and winnow the chaff from the wheat.” Loughran v. Kincheloe, 160 Va. 292, 298 , 168 S.E. 362, 364 (1933).

2014Consequently, it is the duty of an appellant’s counsel “to ‘lay his finger on the error’ in his [assignment of error],” Carroll v. Commonwealth, 280 Va. 641, 649 , 701 S.E.2d 414, 418 (2010) (quoting First Nat’l Bank, 106 Va. [at] 342, 56 S.E. [at] 163), and not to invite an appellate court “to delve into the record and winnow the chaff from the wheat.” Loughran v. Kincheloe, 160 Va. 292, 298 , 168 S.E. 362, 364 (1933).

11
Fitzgerald v. Bassgreen
vactapp · 1988 · cited in 1 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009In Puckett v. Commonwealth, 134 Va. 574, 579-80 , 113 S.E. 853, 854 (1922), the then Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals quoted from Clements v. Hearne, 45 Tex. 415 (1876), as follows: “ ‘To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed ... would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business....’” See also Nicholas *204 v. Harnsberger, 180 Va. 203, 208 , 22 S.E.2d 23, 25 (1942); Fitzgerald v. Bass,

2009In Puckett v. Commonwealth, 134 Va. 574, 579-80 , 113 S.E. 853, 854 (1922), the then Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals quoted from Clements v. Hearne, 45 Tex. 415 (1876), as follows: “ ‘To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed ... would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business....’” See also Nicholas *204 v. Harnsberger, 180 Va. 203, 208 , 22 S.E.2d 23, 25 (1942); Fitzgerald v. Bass,

11
Nicholas v. Harnsbergergreen
va · 1942 · cited in 1 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009In Puckett v. Commonwealth, 134 Va. 574, 579-80 , 113 S.E. 853, 854 (1922), the then Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals quoted from Clements v. Hearne, 45 Tex. 415 (1876), as follows: “ ‘To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed ... would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business....’” See also Nicholas *204 v. Harnsberger, 180 Va. 203, 208 , 22 S.E.2d 23, 25 (1942); Fitzgerald v. Bass,

2009In Puckett v. Commonwealth, 134 Va. 574, 579-80 , 113 S.E. 853, 854 (1922), the then Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals quoted from Clements v. Hearne, 45 Tex. 415 (1876), as follows: “ ‘To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed ... would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business....’” See also Nicholas *204 v. Harnsberger, 180 Va. 203, 208 , 22 S.E.2d 23, 25 (1942); Fitzgerald v. Bass,

11
Mullin v. Mullingreen
vactapp · 2005 · cited in 1 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009In Puckett v. Commonwealth, 134 Va. 574, 579-80 , 113 S.E. 853, 854 (1922), the then Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals quoted from Clements v. Hearne, 45 Tex. 415 (1876), as follows: “ ‘To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed ... would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business....’” See also Nicholas *204 v. Harnsberger, 180 Va. 203, 208 , 22 S.E.2d 23, 25 (1942); Fitzgerald v. Bass,

2009In Puckett v. Commonwealth, 134 Va. 574, 579-80 , 113 S.E. 853, 854 (1922), the then Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals quoted from Clements v. Hearne, 45 Tex. 415 (1876), as follows: “ ‘To require the appellee or the court to hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed ... would obviously be unreasonable and oppressive on the party recovering judgment, and most burdensome on this court, unnecessarily impeding the progress of its business....’” See also Nicholas *204 v. Harnsberger, 180 Va. 203, 208 , 22 S.E.2d 23, 25 (1942); Fitzgerald v. Bass,

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
Commonwealth v. Perkins (ORDER) green
· 2018
2 sentences

2023Although Fitzgerald’s assignment of error is perhaps inartfully worded, we nevertheless conclude that the assignment of error “adequately puts the [C]ourt and opposing counsel on notice as to ‘what points [Fitzgerald]’s counsel intends to ask a reversal of the judgment or decree’ and prevents them from having to ‘hunt through the record for every conceivable error which the court below may have committed.’” Findlay v. Commonwealth, 287 Va. 111 , 116 (2014). -4- “To be guilty of malicious wounding, a person must also intend to permanently, not merely temporarily, harm another person.” Perkins,

2023“Intent is the purpose formed in a person’s mind which may, and often must, be inferred from the facts and circumstances in a particular case.” Id.

12023–2023

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check