10 Virginia opinions name it 5 courts 1960–2018 0 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. City of Covingtongreen2 sentences2012Smith v. City of Covington, 205 Va. 104, 108-09 , 135 S.E.2d 220, 223 (1964). 2012Smith v. City of Covington, 205 Va. 104, 108-09 , 135 S.E.2d 220, 223 (1964). | 2 | 2 |
Gwinn v. Alwardgreen2 sentences2003As the Supreme Court held in Gwinn v. Alward, 235 Va. 616, 621 , 369 S.E.2d 410, 412 (1988), "the decision by the zoning administrator that [the land owner] was operating . . . on the property in violation of the zoning ordinance was a thing decided and was not subject to attack by [the land owner] . . . because [the land owner] never appealed the various decisions in which he was declared in - 5 - violation of the zoning ordinance." See also Guinn v. Collier, 247 Va. 479, 484 , 443 S.E.2d 161, 163-64 (1994). 2003As the Supreme Court held in Gwinn v. Alward, 235 Va. 616, 621 , 369 S.E.2d 410, 412 (1988), "the decision by the zoning administrator that [the land owner] was operating . . . on the property in violation of the zoning ordinance was a thing decided and was not subject to attack by [the land owner] . . . because [the land owner] never appealed the various decisions in which he was declared in - 5 - violation of the zoning ordinance." See also Guinn v. Collier, 247 Va. 479, 484 , 443 S.E.2d 161, 163-64 (1994). | 1 | 2 |
Gwinn v. Colliergreen2 sentences2003As the Supreme Court held in Gwinn v. Alward, 235 Va. 616, 621 , 369 S.E.2d 410, 412 (1988), "the decision by the zoning administrator that [the land owner] was operating . . . on the property in violation of the zoning ordinance was a thing decided and was not subject to attack by [the land owner] . . . because [the land owner] never appealed the various decisions in which he was declared in - 5 - violation of the zoning ordinance." See also Guinn v. Collier, 247 Va. 479, 484 , 443 S.E.2d 161, 163-64 (1994). 2003As the Supreme Court held in Gwinn v. Alward, 235 Va. 616, 621 , 369 S.E.2d 410, 412 (1988), "the decision by the zoning administrator that [the land owner] was operating . . . on the property in violation of the zoning ordinance was a thing decided and was not subject to attack by [the land owner] . . . because [the land owner] never appealed the various decisions in which he was declared in - 5 - violation of the zoning ordinance." See also Guinn v. Collier, 247 Va. 479, 484 , 443 S.E.2d 161, 163-64 (1994). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Cruickshank v. Bidwell
green
2 sentences1960Va. 891, 902 , 69 S. E. 2d 48 , the court observed in denying the prayer for a mandatory injunction: “The facts disclosed by the pleadings in this suit do not establish any urgent necessity for the injunctive relief sought by the plaintiffs or that such relief is necessary to prevent irreparable injury to the property which they claim; and the absence of either of these requisites deprives them of any right to relief by a mandatory injunction. ^ 7 > In Cruickshank v. Bidwell, 176 U. S. 73, 81 , 20 S. Ct. 280 , 44 L. ed. 377, the court said: “The sole ground of equity jurisdiction put forward i 1960Va. 891, 902 , 69 S. E. 2d 48 , the court observed in denying the prayer for a mandatory injunction: “The facts disclosed by the pleadings in this suit do not establish any urgent necessity for the injunctive relief sought by the plaintiffs or that such relief is necessary to prevent irreparable injury to the property which they claim; and the absence of either of these requisites deprives them of any right to relief by a mandatory injunction. ^ 7 > In Cruickshank v. Bidwell, 176 U. S. 73, 81 , 20 S. Ct. 280 , 44 L. ed. 377, the court said: “The sole ground of equity jurisdiction put forward i | 2 | 1960–1960 |
Backus v. Abbot
green
2 sentences1960In Backus Abbot, 136 W.Va. 891, 902 , 69 S.E.2d 48 , the court observed in denying the prayer for a mandatory injunction: "The facts disclosed by the pleadings in this suit do not establish any urgent necessity for the injunctive relief sought by the plaintiffs or that such relief is necessary to prevent irreparable injury to the property which they claim; and the absence of either of these requisites deprives them of any right to relief by a mandatory injunction. * * *." In Cruickshank Bidwell, 176 U.S. 73, 81 , 20 S.Ct. 280 , 44 L.ed. 377, the court said: "The sole ground of equity jurisdict 1960Va. 891, 902 , 69 S. E. 2d 48 , the court observed in denying the prayer for a mandatory injunction: “The facts disclosed by the pleadings in this suit do not establish any urgent necessity for the injunctive relief sought by the plaintiffs or that such relief is necessary to prevent irreparable injury to the property which they claim; and the absence of either of these requisites deprives them of any right to relief by a mandatory injunction. ^ 7 > In Cruickshank v. Bidwell, 176 U. S. 73, 81 , 20 S. Ct. 280 , 44 L. ed. 377, the court said: “The sole ground of equity jurisdiction put forward i | 2 | 1960–1960 |
Jenkins v. Mehra
green
1 sentence2018Id. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Commonwealth v. Holloway
green
1 sentence1996Commonwealth v. Holloway, 9 Va. App. 11 (1989). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Blake Const. Co., Inc. v. Alley
green
1 sentence1993The defendants rely on Sensenbrenner v. Rust, Orling and Neale, 236 Va. 419 (1988), and Blake Construction Co. v. Alley, 233 Va. 31 (1987). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Sensenbrenner v. Rust, Orling & Neale, Architects, Inc.
green
1 sentence1993The defendants rely on Sensenbrenner v. Rust, Orling and Neale, 236 Va. 419 (1988), and Blake Construction Co. v. Alley, 233 Va. 31 (1987). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Guy v. Guy
green
2 sentences1975This directive, the husband contends, amounts to an award of the use and possession, or of the ownership, of the property in violation of the rule enunciated in Guy v. Guy, 210 Va. 536 , 172 S.E.2d 735 (1970). 1975This directive, the husband contends, amounts to an award of the use and possession, or of the ownership, of the property in violation of the rule enunciated in Guy v. Guy, 210 Va. 536 , 172 S.E.2d 735 (1970). | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.