Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Virginia opinions name it 3 courts 1934–2013 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 |
|---|---|---|
Board of Supervisors v. Leasco Realty, Inc.green2 sentences1995And, as we have repeatedly held, “when it is impossible to achieve both fair market value and uniformity, the preferred standard is uniformity.” Bd. of Sup. v. Telecommunications Industries, 246 Va. 472, 477 , 436 S.E.2d 442, 445 (1993); Fairfax Co. v. Leasco, 221 Va. 158, 166 , 267 S.E.2d 608, 613 (1980). 1995And, as we have repeatedly held, “when it is impossible to achieve both fair market value and uniformity, the preferred standard is uniformity.” Bd. of Sup. v. Telecommunications Industries, 246 Va. 472, 477 , 436 S.E.2d 442, 445 (1993); Fairfax Co. v. Leasco, 221 Va. 158, 166 , 267 S.E.2d 608, 613 (1980). | 2 | 4 |
Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County v. Telecommunications Industries, Inc.green2 sentences1995And, as we have repeatedly held, “when it is impossible to achieve both fair market value and uniformity, the preferred standard is uniformity.” Bd. of Sup. v. Telecommunications Industries, 246 Va. 472, 477 , 436 S.E.2d 442, 445 (1993); Fairfax Co. v. Leasco, 221 Va. 158, 166 , 267 S.E.2d 608, 613 (1980). 1995And, as we have repeatedly held, “when it is impossible to achieve both fair market value and uniformity, the preferred standard is uniformity.” Bd. of Sup. v. Telecommunications Industries, 246 Va. 472, 477 , 436 S.E.2d 442, 445 (1993); Fairfax Co. v. Leasco, 221 Va. 158, 166 , 267 S.E.2d 608, 613 (1980). | 1 | 2 |
Oak Knolls Realty Corp. v. Thomasgreen2 sentences2011Rather, the majority holds a trial court does not err by applying the reliability test, but "the balancing test ought to be the preferred test." Appellate courts make decisions in part "as a guide for the trial courts." Oak Knolls Realty Corp. v. Thomas, 212 Va. 396, 397 , 184 S.E.2d 809, 810 (1971); see also Smith v. Commonwealth, 56 Va.App. 351, 367 , 693 S.E.2d 765, 773 (2010) (Petty, J., dissenting) ("Fortunately, the Supreme Court . . . expressly defined the term [jurisdiction] so as to guide both the bench and bar. . . ."). 2011Rather, the majority holds a trial court does not err by applying the reliability test, but "the balancing test ought to be the preferred test." Appellate courts make decisions in part "as a guide for the trial courts." Oak Knolls Realty Corp. v. Thomas, 212 Va. 396, 397 , 184 S.E.2d 809, 810 (1971); see also Smith v. Commonwealth, 56 Va.App. 351, 367 , 693 S.E.2d 765, 773 (2010) (Petty, J., dissenting) ("Fortunately, the Supreme Court . . . expressly defined the term [jurisdiction] so as to guide both the bench and bar. . . ."). | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2011Rather, the majority holds a trial court does not err by applying the reliability test, but "the balancing test ought to be the preferred test." Appellate courts make decisions in part "as a guide for the trial courts." Oak Knolls Realty Corp. v. Thomas, 212 Va. 396, 397 , 184 S.E.2d 809, 810 (1971); see also Smith v. Commonwealth, 56 Va.App. 351, 367 , 693 S.E.2d 765, 773 (2010) (Petty, J., dissenting) ("Fortunately, the Supreme Court . . . expressly defined the term [jurisdiction] so as to guide both the bench and bar. . . ."). 2011Rather, the majority holds a trial court does not err by applying the reliability test, but "the balancing test ought to be the preferred test." Appellate courts make decisions in part "as a guide for the trial courts." Oak Knolls Realty Corp. v. Thomas, 212 Va. 396, 397 , 184 S.E.2d 809, 810 (1971); see also Smith v. Commonwealth, 56 Va.App. 351, 367 , 693 S.E.2d 765, 773 (2010) (Petty, J., dissenting) ("Fortunately, the Supreme Court . . . expressly defined the term [jurisdiction] so as to guide both the bench and bar. . . ."). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Blevins v. Lovelace's
green
2 sentences1934In our opinion no error was committed by the trial court in sustaining the plea of res judicata, as the case at bar is ruled by the case of Blevins v. Lovelace’s Executor, 142 Va. 493 , 129 S. E. 247, 248 . 'In that case plaintiff filed a bill in equity against the defendant, claiming that a legacy to plaintiff from defendant’s testator was given for a valuable consideration and constituted a preferred claim due from the estate, and to that end praying a construction of the will. 1934In our opinion no error was committed by the trial court in sustaining the plea of res judicata, as the case at bar is ruled by the case of Blevins v. Lovelace’s Executor, 142 Va. 493 , 129 S. E. 247, 248 . 'In that case plaintiff filed a bill in equity against the defendant, claiming that a legacy to plaintiff from defendant’s testator was given for a valuable consideration and constituted a preferred claim due from the estate, and to that end praying a construction of the will. | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.