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 1988–2026 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Jones v. Morris Plan Bankgreen2 sentences1990Jones, 168 Va. at 291 , 191 S.E. at 610 [emphasis added]. [ 2 ] The rule against claim-splitting exists to protect a defendant from vexatious and costly litigation resulting from a multiplicity of suits on the same cause of action. 1990Jones, 168 Va. at 291 , 191 S.E. at 610 [emphasis added]. [ 2 ] The rule against claim-splitting exists to protect a defendant from vexatious and costly litigation resulting from a multiplicity of suits on the same cause of action. | 1 | 3 |
Funny Guy, LLC v. Lecego, LLCgreen1 sentence2026See Bill Greever Corp., 256 Va. at 254-56 . -5- subsequent suit any issue of fact actually litigated and essential to a valid and final personal judgment in the first action.’” Plofchan v. Plofchan, 299 Va. 534 , 543 (2021) (alteration in original) (quoting Funny Guy, 293 Va. at 142 ). | 1 | 1 |
Bill Greever Corp. v. Tazewell National Bankgreen2 sentences2026See Bill Greever Corp. v. Tazewell Nat’l Bank, 256 Va. 250, 254 (1998). 2026And “the rule against claim-splitting” is “enforce[d]” through application of “the doctrine of res judicata.” Bill Greever Corp., 256 Va. at 254 . | 1 | 1 |
Flora, Flora & Montague, Inc. v. Saundersgreen2 sentences2020“The rule against claim-splitting exists to protect a defendant from vexatious and costly litigation resulting from a multiplicity of suits on the same cause of action.” Flora, Flora & Montague, Inc. v. Saunders, 235 Va. 306, 311 (1988) (emphasis added). 2020As we have recognized, “[n]o one ought to be twice vexed for one and the same cause.” Id. (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gary Steel Products Corp. v. Kitchin
green
2 sentences1998Rather, we have held that the rule against claim-splitting “exists for the benefit and protection of the defendant.” Gary Steel, 197 Va. at 474 , 90 S.E.2d at 122 . 1998Rather, we have held that the rule against claim-splitting “exists for the benefit and protection of the defendant.” Gary Steel, 197 Va. at 474 , 90 S.E.2d at 122 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
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.