Messick v. Thomas

Citations

• 84 Va. 891
• 6 S.E. 482
• 1888 Va. LEXIS 161

Syllabus

<p>1. Ejectment—Declaration—Verdict.—Where, under Code 1873, ch. 131, declaration avers that plaintiff was possessed of an estate in fee, and defendant entered upon this estate and unlawfully withholds possession thereof from plaintiff, and defendant pleads “ not guilty,” verdict is: “We, the jury, find for the plaintiff that he is entitled in fee to the whole of the premises in his declaration described, and that all the defendants were in possession of a part thereof, or claimed title to such part at the commencement of this suit:” held, The verdict responds to the issue. Hanley v. Twyman, 24 Gratt., 516.</p> <p>2. Idem— Verdict— Uncertainty.—When the premises are described in declaration with “ convenient certainty,” and verdict is that plaintiff is entitled in fee to “ the whole of the premises in the declaration described,” such verdict is not defective for uncertainty.</p> <p>3. Idem— Possession of part—Verdict for all.—When defendant at trial proves that he is in possession of and claiming title to only a part, verdict and judgment for plaintiff for the whole land claimed in declaration, is not erroneous, or at least, not one whereby defendant is injured. Carrington v. Goddin, 13 Gratt., 587.</p>