satisfaction claim (Virginia) · Go Syfert
← Virginia issues

satisfaction claim in Virginia

7 Virginia opinions name it 2 courts 1846–1977 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Shortt v. Hudson Supply & Equipment Co.green
va · 1950 · cited in 1 Virginia opinions naming this issue, 1977–1977
2 sentences

1977“The satisfaction of the claim by the wrongdoer, and not the form of the instrument executed by the plaintiff, extinguished the claim of the latter.” Shortt v. Hudson Supply, Etc., Co., 191 Va. 306, 313 , 60 S.E.2d 900, 904 (1950).

1977“The satisfaction of the claim by the wrongdoer, and not the form of the instrument executed by the plaintiff, extinguished the claim of the latter.” Shortt v. Hudson Supply, Etc., Co., 191 Va. 306, 313 , 60 S.E.2d 900, 904 (1950).

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 (5)

CaseCitedYears
Hanna v. Wilson neutral
va · 1846
2 sentences

1846Hanna v. Wilson, 3 Gratt. 243 , 46 Am.

1846Hanna v. Wilson, 3 Gratt. 243 , 46 Am.

31846–1846
Kromer v. . Heim green
ny · 1879
1 sentence

1962Jur. page 254; Kromer v. Heim, 75 N.Y. 574 , 31 Am.

11962–1962
Rector v. Hancock green
· 1920
1 sentence

1962It is true that if the consummation of the executory agreement had been itself the object of the accord then the consummation of such agreement (which was completed by exhibits 1 and 2) might have constituted acceptance in satisfaction of and in substitution of, the pre existing demand (here the tort claim) and in such case its execution alone would have been sufficient satisfaction to constitute an execution of the accord, Rector v. Hancock, 127 Va. 101 (1920), but for such situation to exist it must be clear from the evidence that the owner of the chose in action has agreed to accept the exe

11962–1962
Haney v. Cheatham green
wash · 1941
1 sentence

1950In Cooley on Torts, 4th Ed., Vol. 1, sec. 83, p. 263, in discussing the effect of a release or other settlement with one wrongdoer, the author says: “* * * where the bar accrues in favor of some of the wrongdoers by reason of what has been received from or done in respect to one or. more others, * * * the bar arises not from any particular form that the proceeding assumes, but from the fact that the injured party has actually received satisfaction, or what in law is deemed the equivalent.” In Haney v. Cheatham, 8 Wash. (2d) 310, 111 P. (2d) 1003 , it was held that a covenant not to sue one joi

11950–1950
Fidelity Loan & Trust Co. v. Dennis neutral
va · 1896
2 sentences

1923(Fidelity Loan, etc., Co. v. Dennis, 93 Va. 504 , 25 S. E. 546 .) The question presented, then, is whether under the circumstances shown the contractors are entitled to have the two lots, with the building thereon, sold for the satisfaction of the lien claimed.

1923(Fidelity Loan, etc., Co. v. Dennis, 93 Va. 504 , 25 S. E. 546 .) The question presented, then, is whether under the circumstances shown the contractors are entitled to have the two lots, with the building thereon, sold for the satisfaction of the lien claimed.

11923–1923

Where else courts name it

CA 29 (1869–2025) IL 27 (1886–2014) NY 23 (1876–2018) TX 23 (1918–2024) FL 15 (1938–2009) OH 13 (1897–2022) TN 13 (1885–2011) AL 12 (1860–1994) PA 12 (1922–2026) MD 9 (1910–2019) MO 9 (1897–2002) MA 8 (1906–1953) LA 8 (1937–2013) GA 8 (1966–2020) AR 8 (1902–2006) IA 8 (1863–1989) KS 7 (1904–2002) VA 7 (1846–1977) IN 7 (1898–2000) KY 7 (1874–2009) MI 6 (1914–2025) CO 5 (1893–1967) NC 5 (1916–1950) WA 5 (1892–1978) OK 4 (1966–2021) NJ 4 (1961–2025) WV 3 (1963–2004) MS 3 (1843–1959) NH 3 (2005–2020) VT 3 (1863–1917) WI 3 (1878–1984) CT 3 (1950–2001) OR 3 (1900–1974) MN 2 (1918–2015) WY 2 (1953–1963) MT 2 (1926–1936) HI 2 (1898–1956) AK 2 (1983–2007) DE 2 (1982–2025)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check