Difference between revisions of "Maupin v. Whiting"
m |
m |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Maupin v. Whiting''}} | {{DISPLAYTITLE:''Maupin v. Whiting''}} | ||
| − | [[File:CallMaupinvWhiting1854v1p224.jpg|link={{filepath:CallsReports1854V1MaupinvWhiting.pdf}}|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:CallsReports1854V1MaupinvWhiting.pdf|''Maupin v. Whiting'']], in [https:// | + | [[File:CallMaupinvWhiting1854v1p224.jpg|link={{filepath:CallsReports1854V1MaupinvWhiting.pdf}}|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:CallsReports1854V1MaupinvWhiting.pdf|''Maupin v. Whiting'']], in [https://wm.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01COWM_INST/g9pr7p/alma991006014269703196 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia''], by Daniel Call. Ed. by Lucian Minor, 3rd ed. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854.]] |
[[Media:CallsReports1854V1MaupinvWhiting.pdf|''Maupin v. Whiting'']], 5 Va. (1 Call) 195 (1798),<ref>Daniel Call, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals in Virginia,'' (Richmond: A. Morris, 1854), 1:195.</ref> was a case where the Court determined when a creditor/debtor issue should be raised in a Court of Equity or a Court of Law. | [[Media:CallsReports1854V1MaupinvWhiting.pdf|''Maupin v. Whiting'']], 5 Va. (1 Call) 195 (1798),<ref>Daniel Call, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals in Virginia,'' (Richmond: A. Morris, 1854), 1:195.</ref> was a case where the Court determined when a creditor/debtor issue should be raised in a Court of Equity or a Court of Law. | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
[[Category: Cases]] | [[Category: Cases]] | ||
| + | [[Category: Debtor-Creditor]] | ||
| + | [[Category: Procedure]] | ||
Latest revision as of 12:15, 7 September 2023
Maupin v. Whiting, 5 Va. (1 Call) 195 (1798),[1] was a case where the Court determined when a creditor/debtor issue should be raised in a Court of Equity or a Court of Law.
Background
Maupin was assigned a replevy bond purportedly entered into by John Whiting for security. When Maupin came to Whiting to obtain the funds from the bond, Whiting was surprised to hear about it and stated that he had not written the bond, executed it, or even heard of it before. Whiting, then, went to the Deputy Sheriff by whom the bond was executed. The Sheriff told Whiting not make an issue of the situation. Whiting stated he wouldn’t so long as he was not sued for the bond. After Maupin obtained a judgment for the bond, Whiting sued for an injunction against the execution of the bond and named the Sheriff a defendant in the lawsuit.
The Court's Decision
After hearing the case, Chancellor Wythe perpetuated the injunction in favor of Whiting. The Court of Appeals reversed stating the issue should have gone to trial and dismissed the case with court costs.
See also
References
- ↑ Daniel Call, Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals in Virginia, (Richmond: A. Morris, 1854), 1:195.
