When writings to be recorded in county, and when in corporation (§ 55-102)—Virginia Decoded

When writings to be recorded in county, and when in corporation

The provisions of this and any other chapter of this Code or of any subsequent statute, by virtue of which a writing is to be or may be recorded in the county or corporation wherein the property embraced in such writing is, shall be construed, in respect to the county, as relating only to property within the county and without the corporate limits of the corporation having a court wherein writings may be lawfully admitted to record, and, in respect to the corporation, as relating only to property within the corporate limits of such corporation having such a court.

History

Code 1919, § 5199.

Download

Court Decisions

. . . Needham Holder v. City of Raleigh Jack C. Duncan, Needham . . . (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 02/14/89)
. . . himself. Connecticut v. Teal, 457 U.S. 440, 454-55, 102 S.Ct. 2525, 2534-35, 73 L.Ed.2d 130 (1982). . . .

. . . Leaman H. Caswell v. Judith N. Lang, in Re Leaman H. . . . (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 03/19/85)
. . . pronouncement in Ridgway v. Ridgway, 454 U.S. 46, 54-55, 102 S.Ct. 49, 54-55, 70 L.Ed.2d 39 (1981) . . .

. . . United States v. Thomas Calvin Ricks, A/K/A Joe Dancer, . . . (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 08/18/89)
. . . .1987), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 109 S.Ct. 55, 102 L.Ed.2d 33 (1988). Our conclusion flows from . . .

. . . Rum Creek Coal Sales, Incorporated v. Honorable W. Gaston . . . (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 05/06/91)
. . . insurance companies); Zobel v. Williams, 457 U.S. 55, 102 S.Ct. 2309, 72 L.Ed.2d 672 (1982) . . .

United States v. Arch Trading Company (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 02/26/93)
. . . States, 488 U.S. 361, 371-74, 109 S.Ct. 647, 654-55, 102 L.Ed.2d 714 (1989), a challenge to a . . .

. . . United States v. Timothy Jay Blackwell, A/K/A Tiny Lawrence . . . (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 07/24/90)
. . . .1987), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 109 S.Ct. 55, 102 L.Ed.2d 33 (1988). Because the . . .

. . . In Re Stansbury Poplar Place, Incorporated in Re Stansbury . . . (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 12/27/93)
. . . included the power to hold jury trials, id. at 55, 102 S.Ct. at 2863, was unconstitutional. . . .

. . . Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Bge Corp. v. Frank O. . . . (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 05/02/85)
. . . by Burger, C.J., and Powell, J.); id. at 654-55, 102 S.Ct. at 2647-48 (Stevens, J., concurring in . . .

Podracky v. Com. (COA, 06/10/08)
. . . be prohibited. . . .

Front Royal & Warren Cty. Ind. Park v. Front Royal (District Court, W.D. Virginia, 03/16/89)
. . . certain arbitrary date); Zobel v. Williams, 457 U.S. 55, 102 S.Ct. 2309, 72 L.Ed.2d 672 (1982) . . .

Court opinions are provided by CourtListener, which is developed by the Free Law Project.