1 Call 484 | Va. Ct. App. | 1799
Delivered the resolution of the Court, that there was no weight in the objection, that the quantity of the estate was not mentioned in the judgment; for, that is not necessary under the act of Assembly. But, that the judgment of the District Court was to be reversed, because the demandant had omitted to set forth the boundaries of the land in his count.
The judgment was as follows: “ The Court is of opinion that the said judgment is erroneous in this, that the boun
[* Turberville v. Long, 3 H. & M. 309; Lovel v. Arnold, 2 Munf. 167.]