Chapter 56. PLEADING AND PRACTICE.
Article 1. Venue.
§1. Venue in General.—Any action or other proceeding at law or suit in equity, except where it is otherwise specially provided, may hereafter be brought in the circuit court of any county:
(a) Wherein any of the defendants may reside, except that an action of ejectment or unlawful detainer must be brought in the county wherein the land sought to be recovered, or some part thereof, is; or
(b) If a corporation be a defendant, wherein its principal office is, or wherein its mayor, president or other chief officer resides; or if its principal office be not in this State, and its mayor, president or other chief officer do not reside therein, wherein it does business; or if it be a corporation organized under the laws of this State, which has its principal office located outside of this State, and which has no office or place of business within the State, the circuit court of the county in which the plaintiff resides or the circuit court of the county in which the seat of state government is located shall have jurisdiction of all actions at law or suits in equity against such corporation, where the cause of action arose in this State or grew out of the rights of stockholders with respect to corporate management; or
(c) If it be to recover land or subject it to a debt, wherein such land or any part thereof may be; or
(d) If it be against one or more nonresidents of the State, wherein any one of them may be found and served with process, or may have estate or debts due him or them; or
(e) If it be to recover a loss under any policy of insurance, upon either property, life or health or against injury to a person, wherein the property insured was situated either at the date of the policy or at the time when the right of action accrued, or the person insured had a legal residence at the date of his death or at the time when the right of action accrued; or (f) If it be on behalf of the State in the name of the attorney general or otherwise wherein the seat of government is; or
(g) If a judge of a circuit be interested in a case which, but for such interest, would be proper for the jurisdiction of his court, the action or suit may be brought in any county in an adjoining circuit.(Code 1849, c. 169, §1; Code 1860, c. 169, §1; Code 1868, c. 123, §1; 1872-3, c. 109, §1; c. 197, §1; 1882, c. 73, §1; 1891, c. 54, §1; 1897, c. 46, §1; Code 1923, c. 123, §1; 1927, c. 65.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 1, c. 123, Code 1923, is modified as follows: (a) Venue of the proceeding by notice of motion for judgment, or other summary proceeding, is laid, (b) Subdivision (d) is amended to expressly cover a case wherein there is more than one nonresident defendant, although the prior statute probably included such case, (c) Subdivision (e) gives the right of action to recover a e loss under a policy of insurance upon property in the county where the property is situate at the date of the policy or at the time the right of action accrued, and upon a policy insuring the life or health of, or against injury, to, a person, in the county in which the insured had a legal residence at the time of his death, or at the time the right of action accrued, (d) In case a judge is disqualified by interest, the suit may be brought in any county in an adjoining circuit, so that the plaintiff may select the county most convenient and accessible in any adjoining circuit.
Committee’s Note.—The first paragraph of Acts , 1927, c. 65, is inserted in transposed form at the e end of subdivision (b) of the foregoing section. The second paragraph of said c. 65 is omitted as covered in c. 31, art. 1, §71.
§2. In the County Where Cause of Action Arose.—An action, suit or proceeding may be brought in any county wherein the cause of action, or any part thereof, arose, although none of the defendants reside therein, in the following instances:
(a) When the defendant, or if more than one defendant, one or more of the defendants, is a corporation;
(b) When the defendant, or if more than one defendant, one or more of the defendants, are served in such county with process or notice commencing such action, suit or proceeding.(Code 1849, c. 169, §2; Code 1860, c. 169, §2; Code 1868, c. 123, §2; 1872-3, c. 197, §2; 1882, c. 73, §2; Code 1923, c. 123, §2.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 2, c. 123, Code 1923, is modified as follows: (a) A proceeding or suit other than an “action” is expressly authorized, (b) The jurisdiction, if one or more of the defendants is a corporation, is made plain and specific instead of being controlled and limited by the terms of §2, c. 124, Code 1923, governing the direction of process. (c) When one defendant is served in the county in which the cause of action arose and suit is brought, it is deemed advisable to permit the bringing in of all of the defendants for the following reasons; (1) To prevent an unnecessary number of suits upon the same instrument or cause of action. (2) Very frequently the party actually served might, as among the obligors, be a surety for others, and it is only right that a judgment should go against all of the obligors so that if the person bearing the relation of surety be compelled to pay the debt or obligation he will have the benefit of a lien against the person primarily bound. Section 3, c. 123, Code 1923, is transferred to c. 53, where the subjects are treated separately in different articles.
Article 2. Notices and Motions.
§1. Service of Notices; Personal Service; Substituted Service; Return.—A notice, no particular mode of serving which is prescribed, may be served by delivering a copy thereof in writing to the party in person; or if he (or she) be not found, by delivering such copy at his (or her) usual place of abode, and giving information of its purport, to his wife (or her husband), or to any other person found there who is a member of his (or her) family and above the age of sixteen years; or if neither his wife (or her husband) nor any such other person be found there, and he (or she) be not found, by leaving such copy posted at the front door of such place of abode. Any sheriff or constable, thereto required, shall serve a notice within his county and make return of the manner and time of service; for a failure so to do he shall forfeit twenty dollars. Such return, or a similar return by any other person who verified if by affidavit, shall be evidence of the manner and time of service.(Code 1849, c. 167, §1; Code 1860, c. 167, §1; Code 1868, c. 121, §1; 1882, c. 74, §1; Code 1923, c. 121, §1.)
Revisers’ Note.—Although subdivision (a) of §10, art. 2, c. 2, provides that “a word importing the masculine gender only may be applied to females as well as males,” it is deemed advisable to provide expressly for substituted service on a married woman, placing her on the same footing as a married man. These changes are embraced within parentheses.
§2. Service by Publication.—Any such notice to a person not residing in this State may be served by the publication thereof once a week for three successive weeks in a newspaper published in this State.(Code 1849, c. 167, §2; Code 1860, c. 167, §2; Code 1868, c. 121, §2; 1882, c. 74, §2; Code 1923, c. 121, §2.)
Revisers’ Note.—The revised section reduces the period of publication from four to three weeks, and substitutes the word “published” in lieu of “printed.”
§3. Notice to Take Depositions.—Notice to any party to take a deposition may be served on the counsel of such party, or on any one of such counsel, if there be more than one, and such service shall have like effect as if the notice were served on the party, provided the time between the service of notice and taking the deposition be sufficient for conveying, by ordinary course of mail, a letter from the place of service to the place of residence of the party, and a reply from that place back to the place of service, and then for the counsel to attend at the place of taking the deposition. In all cases when notice is served on counsel as aforesaid, the court, upon exception being taken, may determine whether, under all the circumstances, the notice has been served in reasonable time, and admit or reject the deposition accordingly.(1852, c. 88, §1; Code 1860, c. 167, §3; Code 1868, c. 121, §3; 1882, c. 74, §3; Code 1923, c. 121, §3.)
Revisers’ Note.—The revised section differs from the former statute in permitting service of a notice to take depositions on the counsel of resident as well as nonresident parties or on any one of such counsel, if there be more than one.
§4. Motion on Certain Bonds.—In the case of any bond taken by an officer, or given by a sheriff or constable, and returned to or filed in the office of the clerk of the county court of the county, or any bond or recognizance taken in a criminal case or proceeding, the circuit court of the county, or the court in which any such bond or recognizance is given, may, on motion of any person, or the State, as the case may be, give judgment for so much money as he, or the State, is entitled, by virtue of such bond, to recover by action.(Code 1849, c. 167, §4; Code 1860, c. 167, §5; Code 1868, c. 121, §5; 1872-3, c. 104, §5; 1882, c. 74, §5; Code 1923, c. 121, §5.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is broadened to include any bond or recognizance taken in a criminal case or proceeding, and authorizes the court in which any such bond or recognizance is taken to render judgment thereon, on motion of the State.
§5. Notice of Motion for Judgment.—In any case wherein there may be judgment or decree for money on motion, such motion shall be after ten days’ notice, unless some other time be specified in the section or statute authorizing such motion.(Code 1849, c. 167, §3; Code 1860, c. 167, §4; Code 1868, c. 121, §4; 1882, c. 74, §4; Code 1923, c. 121, §4.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “or statute” after “section” are new, following in this respect §6044, Code Va. 1919.
§6. Motion for Judgment on Contracts; Affidavit of Claim; Plea and Counter Affidavit; Judgment; Discontinuance; Defense.—Any person entitled to recover money by action on any contract may, on motion before any court which would have jurisdiction in an action, obtain judgment for such money after not less than twenty days’ notice, which notice shall be in writing, signed by the plaintiff or his attorney, and shall be returned to the clerk’s office of such court on or before the return day of such notice, and when so returned shall be forthwith filed and the date of filing noted thereon, and shall be placed upon the docket for hearing. Such notice may be served, returned as aforesaid, filed and docketed at any time before or during the term of court at which the motion for judgment is to be made, and shall be heard at such term if the term continues for a period of twenty days after the service of such notice, unless good cause for a continuance thereof be shown. If the court be not in session on the return day as set out in the notice, and the term of court be not ended, the motion shall be considered continued until the next court day of the term, and if the term be ended, then the motion shall stand continued. The return day of a notice under this section shall not be more than ninety days from its date, unless the commencement of the next succeeding term of court be more than ninety days from such date, in which case the return day may be the first day of such term.
In any such motion, if the plaintiff shall file with his notice, and shall serve upon the defend ant at the same time and in the same manner as the notice is served, an affidavit of himself, or some other credible person, stating distinctly the several items of the plaintiff’s claim, and that there is, as the affiant verily believes, due and unpaid from the defendant to the plaintiff upon the demand or demands stated in the notice, including principal and interest, after deducting all payments, credits and sets-off made by the defendant, or to which he is entitled, a sum certain to be named in the affidavit, no plea shall be filed in the case unless the defendant shall file with his plea the affidavit of himself, or some other credible person, that there is not, as the affiant verily believes, any sum due by the defendant to the plaintiff upon the demand or demands stated in the plaintiff’s notice, or stating a sum certain less than that stated in the affidavit filed by the plaintiff, which the affiant verily believes is all that is due from the defendant to the plaintiff upon the demand or demands stated in the plaintiff’s notice. If such plea and affidavit be not filed, on motion of the plaintiff judgment shall, without further proof, be entered for the plaintiff by the court for the sum stated in his affidavit, with interest thereon from the date of the affidavit until paid: Provided, That before entering judgment on any negotiable instrument, the court shall require the plaintiff to file the same in such proceeding. If such plea and affidavit be filed by the defendant and it be admitted in such affidavit that any sum is due from the defendant to the plaintiff, judgment may be taken by the plaintiff for the sum so admitted to be due, with interest thereon from the date of the affidavit filed by the plaintiff until paid, and the case tried as to the residue.
A proceeding under this section shall not be discontinued by reason of the failure of the clerk to docket the same, or by reason of no order of continuance being entered in it from one day to another, or from term to term. Defense to any such motion may be made in the same manner and to the same extent as to an action at law.(Code 1849, c. 167, §5; Code 1860, c. 167, §6; Code 1868, c. 121, §6; 1882, c. 74, §6; 1915, c. 78, §6; Code 1923, c. 121, §6; 1925, c. 81, §6; 1929, c. 39.)
Revisers’ Note.—Changes made are as follows: (a) The provisions in the first sentence requiring the notice to be “in writing, signed by the plaintiff or his attorney,” and to be returned to the clerk’s office within five days after service, forthwith filed, and the date of filing noted thereon, and the fourth sentence, are new, following in these respects §6046, Code Va. 1919, as amended by Acts 1922, p. 763. (b) The notice is to be promptly placed on the docket, (c) The second sentence is redrafted, (d) The affidavits may be made by the plaintiff and defendant or any other credible person. This is desirable in many cases because some person other than the plaintiff or defendant may be much better informed as to the facts; and in case of a corporation it is necessary, (e) The sixth sentence is new and follows a similar provision in §46, c. 125, Code 1923 (§51, art. 4 of this chapter) (f) The provision for docketing the notice under §1, c. 131, Code 1923, is omitted, other provision being made for docketing. (g) The last sentence is transferred from §7, c. 121, Code 1923. The residue of said §7 is omitted because covered in §7, art. 8, c. 55.
Committee’s Note.—The amendment made by the revisers requiring the notice to be returned to the clerk’s office “within five days after service of the same” is changed so as to read “on or before the return day of such notice.” Since a copy of the notice must be served on the defendant, an earlier return is unnecessary. The second sentence of the section is amended so as to require the motion for judgment to be heard during the term to which the notice is made return able, “unless good cause for a continuance thereof be shown.” The words “without further proof” after “shall” in the next to the last sentence of the second paragraph, and the proviso at the end of the same sentence, are new. Said words “without further proof” are inserted in lieu of the last sentence in the first paragraph of Acts 1929, c. 39.
Legislative Note.—The words “or furnish satisfactory proof of its loss,” inserted by the committee after “proceeding” in the proviso near the end of the second paragraph, are omitted.
§7. Trial by Jury.—On a motion, when an issue of fact is joined, and either party desires it, or when in the opinion of the court it is proper, a jury shall be impaneled for the trial of the issue.(Code 1849, c. 167, §7: Code 1860, c. 167, §8; Code 1868, c. 121, §8; 1882, c. 74, §8; Code 1923, c. 121, §8.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “for the trial of the issue,” at the end of the section are added to express what heretofore has been implied.
Article 3. Writs, Process and Order of Publication.
§1. Ancient Writs.—The right and benefit of all writs, remedial and judicial, given by any statute or act of parliament made in aid of the common law prior to the fourth year of the reign of James the First, of a general nature, not local to England, shall still be saved, so far as the same may be consistent with the Constitution of this State, the acts of the general assembly of Virginia passed before the twentieth day of June, eighteen hundred and sixty-three, and the acts of the legislature of this State.(Code 1849, c. 16, §2; Code 1860, c. 16, §2; Code 1868, c. 13, §6; 1882, c. 143, §6; Code 1923, c. 13, §6.)
§2. Writs Abolished.—The writ of right, writ of entry, writ of formedon, writ de homine replegiando, writ of levari facias, writ of elegit, writ of distringas and writ of capias ad satis faciendum are abolished and shall not hereafter be issued.(Code 1849, c. 135, §38, c. 156, §13, c. 187, §2, c. 188, §2; Code 1860, c. 135, §38, c. 156, §13, c. 187, §2, c. 188, §2; Code 1868, c. 90; §38, c. 111, §13, c. 140, §2, c. 141, §1; 1872-3, c. 60, §13, c. 218, §1; 1882, c. 127, §1; Code 1923, c. 90, §38, c. 111, §13, c. 140, §2, c. 141, §1.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is new in the sense that it embraces four sections, heretofore separate, abolishing the enumerated writs, with this difference, that the foregoing section abolishes the writ of distringas for all purposes, omitting the words “except on a judgment for specific personal property,” formerly appearing at the end of §2, c. 140, Code 1923. The provisions of the Code relating to the action of detinue and writ of possession fully cover the situation, with the result that the writ of distringas no longer is useful. See revisers’ note to §6480, Code Va. 1919. While most of the terms used in this section refer primarily to remedies and final process rather than to original process, yet since all are designated in terms of writs, for convenience they are included in one section.
§3. Forms of Writs.—The supreme court of appeals may, from time to time, prescribe the forms of writs and other process, and until the court shall alter the forms, the same may be as heretofore used, except so far as is otherwise provided.(Code 1849, c. 161, §4, c. 170, §1; Code 1860, c. 161, §4, c. 170, §1; Code 1868, c. 114, §3, c. 124, §1; 1872-3, c. 9, §3; 1882, c. 117, §1; Code 1923, c. 114, §3, c. 124, §1.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is a composite of part of §3, c. 114, and §1, c. 124, Code 1923. Only that part of §3, c. 114 pertaining to writs and process is transferred. Only such verbal changes are made in §1, c. 124 as are necessary to conform it to the transferred provisions of §3, c. 114.
§4. Issuance of Process; Alteration.—The process to commence a suit shall be a writ commanding the officer to whom it is directed to summon the defendant to answer the bill or action. It shall be issued on the order of the plaintiff, his attorney or agent, and shall not, after it is issued, be altered, nor any blank there in filled up, except by the clerk.(Code 1849, c. 170 §5; Code 1860, c. 170, §5; Code 1868, c. 124, §5; 1882, c. 117, §5; Code 1923, c. 124, §5.)
§5. Process; Direction; When Returnable; Attachment; Summons for Witness.—Process from any court, whether original, mesne or final, may be directed to the sheriff of any county. Any process shall be returnable, within ninety days after its date, except as provided in section six, article two of this chapter, to the court on any day of a term, or in the clerk’s office to the first day of any rules, designated as the first or last Monday, as the case may be, in any month and year, except that a summons for a witness shall be returnable on whatever day his attendance is desired, and an order of attachment may be returnable to the next term of the court, although more than ninety days from the date of the order, and process awarded in court may be returnable as the court shall direct.(Code 1849, c. 170, §2; 1852, c. 89, §1; Code 1860, c. 170, §2; Code 1868, c. 124, §2 ; 1871, c. 43, §2; 1882, c. 117, §2; 1903, c. 11, §2; Code 1923, c. 124, §2.)
Revisers’ Note.—This is a part of §2, c. 124, Code 1923, relating to the direction and return of process. The exception contained in said section making it impossible for a court to exercise the jurisdiction in certain cases conferred upon it by §2, c. 123, Code 1923, is omitted and the restrictions on the jurisdiction are contained in §2, art. 1 of this chapter, modified as explained in the note to the last named section. The other changes made permit process to be returned to the court on any day of the term instead of the first day only, and to be returned to the clerk’s office on the first day of any rules, whether the first or last Monday in the month. This meets the difficulties which are presented in Fisher v. Crowley, 57 W. Va. 312. The remaining provisions of said §2, c. 124, Code 1923, are contained in §11 of this article.
§6. Delivery of Process; Process Book.—The clerk of every court from whose office may be issued any process, original, mesne or final, or any order or decree to be served on any person, shall, unless the party interested, or his attorney, direct otherwise, deliver the same to the sheriff or other proper officer of the county for which the court is held, if it is to be executed therein, and if it is to be executed in any other county, shall inclose the same in an envelope properly addressed to the sheriff or other proper officer thereof, pay the postage thereon and mail it in the post office. The clerk shall keep a process book, wherein there shall be an entry of every such process, order or decree, showing its nature, date and return day, the person to whom, and the time when it was delivered, or if it was mailed, the time thereof, and the person to whom it was inclosed. From any officer to whom there is such delivery, the clerk shall take a receipt in his process book.(Code 1849, c. 163, §21; 1850-51, c. 41, §11; Code 1860, c. 163, §18; Code 1868, c. 117, §11; 1875, c. 73, §11; Code 1923, c. 117, §11.)
Revisers’ Note.—The word “proper” before “officer” is new, following in this respect §3403, Code Va. 1919. The words “in an envelope properly addressed,” near the end of the first sentence, are added to express what heretofore has been implied. The words “pay the postage thereon,” and “mail it in the post office,” are transposed, and in the phrase last quoted “mail” is used in lieu of “put.”
§7. Officer’s Receipt of Process.—Every officer who attends a court shall, within five days after the end of any rules, go to the clerk’s office and receive all process, orders and decrees to be executed by him and give receipts therefor. For any failure so to do he shall forfeit fifty dollars.(Code 1849, c. 170, §4; Code 1860, c. 170, §4; Code 1868, c. 124, §4; 1882, c. 117, §4; Code 1923, c. 124, §4.)
§8. Proof of Mailing Process to Officer.—Proof that any process or order was put into the post office in an envelope or cover properly addressed to any officer, and that the postage thereon was paid, shall be prima facie evidence of the receipt thereof in due course of mail by the officer to whom it was so addressed; and this evidence may be furnished by the receipt taken at the time the process or order was put into the post office, from the postmaster, his deputy or clerk, and the certificate of a justice of the acknowledgment of the receipt before him. But such evidence may be rebutted by the oath of the officer to whom such process or order was so addressed, that he did not himself receive the same, and believes that it was not received by any of his deputies.(Code 1849, c. 49, §30; Code 1860, c. 49. §29; Code 1868, c. 41, §10; 1881, c. 19, §10; Code 1923, c. 41, §10.)
§9. Service in Other County; Return.—A sheriff or other officer may transmit by mail (the postage thereon being prepaid) any process or order which came to his hands from beyond his county, with his return thereon, in an envelope or cover properly addressed to the officer to whom or whose office such return ought to be made; and the receipt taken at the time from the postmaster, his deputy or clerk, certified as aforesaid, shall be evidence that the process or order, and return, were transmitted as aforesaid.(Code 1849, c. 49, §30; Code 1860, c. 49, §29; Code 1868, c. 41, §11; 1881, c. 19, §11; Code 1923, c. 41, §11.)
§10. Mailing of Process.—If there come directed to a clerk, by mail, a letter with an indorsement on the envelope of the parties’ names, and the nature of the process enclosed, he shall take the same out of the post office, and pay such postage as may be due thereon.(Code 1849, c.163, §22; Code 1860, c. 163, §19; Code 1868, c.117, §12; 1875, c. 73, §12; Code 1923, c. 117, §12.)
Revisers’ Note.—“Due” is used in lieu of “payable” near the end of the section.
§11. Service of Process in General; Execution of Process, Writ or Order When Sheriff is Disqualified.—Any process or notice may be executed on or before the return day thereof. If it appear to be duly served and good in other respects, it shall be deemed valid, although not directed to any officer, or although directed to an officer who is not qualified to execute it, provided it be executed by any other to whom it might lawfully have been directed. In any case in which it would be improper for the sheriff to execute any process, notice, writ or order, or summon a jury, because of interest or other disability, it shall be lawful for any deputy sheriff of such county not similarly disqualified to execute such process, notice, writ or order, or summon such jury, and make return thereof in his own name as deputy sheriff, and the execution and return thereof, if in other respects duly made, shall be valid, though it be directed to the sheriff. Process or notice to commence actions or suits, including writs of scire facias, mandamus, quo warranto, certiorari, prohibition, and alias or other process where the original is returned not executed, may also be served by any credible person; and the return of such person, verified by his affidavit, shall be evidence of the manner and time of service.(Code 1849, c. 49, §§21-24, c. 170, §2; 1852, c. 89, §1; Code 1860, c. 49, §§20-23, c. 170, §2; Code 1868, c. 41, §§1-3, c. 124, §2; 1871, c. 43, §2; 1872-3, c. 30, §1; 1881, c. 19, §§1-3; 1882, c. 117, §2; 1903, c. 11, §2; Code 1923, c. 41, §§1-3, c. 124, §2.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section comprises §§1-3, c. 41, and part of §2, c. 124, Code 1923. See revisers’ note to §5 of this article. The words “who is not qualified to execute it, provided it be” are substituted for “though,” in the second sentence, in order to prevent any writ from being invalid, as stated in Hansford v. Tate, 61 W. Va. 207, merely because it is directed to a disqualified officer, provided it be executed by one who is not disqualified. The third sentence is a redraft of §§1-3, c. 41, Code 1923, in an effort to simplify the service of process where the sheriff is interested. Authorizing the deputy to serve the process, writ or order when the sheriff is disqualified changes the holding in Hansford v. Tate, supra. The words “actions or” before “suits,” at the beginning of the fourth sentence, are added in order to make plain the scope of the sentence.
§12. Service of Summons or Scire Facias; Judgment by Default.—Any summons or scire facias against any person, including a summons for a witness, may be served as a notice is served under section one, article two of this chapter, except that when such process is against a corporation the mode of service shall be as prescribed by the two following sections. To this end the clerk issuing such process, unless otherwise directed, shall deliver or transmit therewith as many copies thereof as there are persons named therein on whom it is to be served. No judgment by default on a scire facias or summons shall become final within twenty days after the service of such process.(Code 1849, c. 170, §6; Code 1860, c. 170, §6; Code 1868, c. 124, §6; 1882, c. 117, §6; Code 1923, c. 124, §6.)
Revisers’ Note.—The clause beginning with the word “except” in the first sentence is new, being taken from §6062, Code Va. 1919. Its purpose is obvious. “This,” at the beginning of the second sentence, is used instead of “which.” In the last sentence, the words “be valid if it,” which formerly followed “shall,” are omitted, following in this respect the corresponding sentence in §6134, Code Va. 1919. In the same sentence, “twenty” is used instead of “thirty,” in order to provide for notices of motion for judgment, which, by virtue of changes made in §6, art. 2 of this chapter, may be made returnable, after twenty days’ notice, to any day of a term, whether served upon the defendant or filed in the clerk’s office before the commencement of such term or not, and which, therefore, may fall within the purview of this sentence, under the decision that a notice of motion for judgment takes the place of both a summons and a declaration in an ordinary action. Jennings v. Wiles, 82 W. Va. 573.
§13. Service of Process or Notice on Domestic Corporations.—Unless otherwise specially provided, process against, or notice to, a corporation created by virtue of the laws of this State may be served as follows:
(a) If a city, town or village, on its mayor, city manager, recorder, clerk, treasurer, or any member of its council or board of commissioners;
(b) If a county court of any county, on any commissioner or the clerk thereof, or if they be absent, on the prosecuting attorney of the county;
(c) If a board of education of any district or independent school district, on the president or any commissioner thereof, or if they be absent, on the prosecuting attorney of the county;
(d) If any other corporation, on the auditor as statutory attorney in fact of such corporation, as provided in section seventy-one, article one, chapter thirty-one of this Code, or on any person appointed by it to accept service of process in its behalf, or on its president or other chief officer, or its vice president, cashier, assistant cashier, treasurer, assistant treasurer, secretary, or any member of its board of directors, or, if no such officer or director be found, on any agent of such corporation, including in the case of a railroad company a depot or station agent in the actual employment of the company.(Code 1849, c. 170, §7; Code 1860, c. 170, §7; 1863, c. 78, §6; Code 1868, c. 39, §62, c. 124, §7; 1872-3, c. 114, §2; 1881, c. 5, §5; 1882, c. 117, §7; Code 1923, c. 39, §5, c. 124, §7.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is taken in part from §7, c. 124, and §5, c. 39, Code 1923, and in part from §6063, Code Va. 1919, as amended by Acts 1922, p. 610. Section 7, c. 124, Code 1923, applied to both domestic and foreign corporations. The revisers deem it advisable to separate the two, and hence the foregoing section is restricted to corporations created by virtue of the laws of this State, and the next succeeding section to foreign corporations. The aim is to eliminate, as far as deemed advisable, all preference between various officers of a corporation in matters of service of process, and thereby to simplify the form of return of process, following in this respect the Virginia section referred to. However, certain preferences are retained, to-wit, the preference of an officer to the prosecuting attorney of the county where the corporation is a county court or board of education, and, as to ordinary corporations, the preference of an officer to an agent. See County Court v. Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 87 W. Va. 504, for definition of an “agent” for purposes of service of process. The provisions relating to boards of education are new. The following sections of Code 1923, relating to service of process on corporations, are omitted: (a) The last sentence of §6, c. 41, and §61, c. 53, because conflicting. The former required process against corporations to be served as provided in §§32-39, c. 50, while the latter permitted it to be served as provided in §7, c. 124. (b) Section 20, c. 52, because substantially incorporated in the participial clause at the end of the section, (c) Section 8, c. 124, because §24, c. 54, to which it refers, is omitted from this Code.
§14. Service of Process or Notice on Foreign Corporations.—Process against, or notice to, a foreign corporation which has a usual place of business in this State, or, with or without such usual place of business, is doing business in this State, permanently or temporarily, and which has qualified to do such business under the laws of this State, may be served in accordance with the provisions of subdivision (d) of the next preceding section.
If such corporation has not qualified to do such business under the laws of this State, service may be made by delivering, within the State, a copy of the process or notice to any officer, director or agent of such corporation acting or transacting business for it in this State.
If there be no statutory attorney in fact, officer, director or agent found in this State upon whom service may be had as aforesaid, then on affidavit of that fact an order of publication may be awarded as provided by sections twenty-three and twenty-four of this article.
Revisers’ Note.—This section is new. See revisers’ note to the next preceding section. The first paragraph is taken in part from §38, c. 223, General Laws of Massachusetts 1921, and applies only to foreign corporations which have qualified to do business in this State. The second paragraph relates only to foreign corporations which have not qualified to do business in this State. As service can be had on the auditor only in case the foreign corporation has been authorized to do business in this State (Leiter v. Fire Engine Co., 86 W. Va. 599), the revisers deem it advisable to broaden the provisions governing service of process on a foreign corporation which is doing business here, without having qualified to do such business, by allowing service of process on any officer, director or agent of the corporation acting or transacting business for it in this State, without prescribing any preference in matters of service as between officers, directors or agents. See County Court v. Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 87 W. Va. 504, for definition of an “agent” for purposes of service of process. Of course, if the foreign corporation is not doing business in this State, service of process upon an officer or agent would not confer jurisdiction to render a personal judgment under either the first or second paragraphs of this section. Hayman v. Coal & Coke Co., 81 W. Va. 144. The third paragraph is taken in substance from the last sentence of §6064, Code Va. 1919, and permits an order of publication only when there is neither a statutory attorney in fact nor any officer, director or agent in the State upon whom process may be served. Observe also that there is no provision in this article requiring process against a foreign corporation to be served on an officer or agent within the county in which he resides, although such has heretofore been the requirement where service on such agent was had pursuant to the provisions of §§35 and 38, c. 50, Code 1923. Leiter v. Fire Engine Co., 86 W. Va. 599. It is not deemed advisable to retain this requirement any longer, since it is not necessary where service is had on an agent of a domestic corporation. Speidel Grocery Co. v. Warder, 56 W. Va. 602; Stout v. B. & O. R. R. Co., 64 W. Va. 502.
§15. Service of Process or Notice on Common Carriers Other Than Corporations.—In a case against any common carrier, other than a corporation, for any liability as such, it shall be sufficient to serve any process against or notice to the carrier on any agent, or the driver, operator, captain or conductor of any vehicle of such carrier.(Code 1849, c. 170, §8; Code 1860, c. 170, §8; Code 1868, c. 124, §9; 1882, c. 117, §9; Code 1923, c. 124, §9.)
Revisers’ Note.—The word “operator” is inserted after “driver.” The words “and to publish a copy of the process or notice as an order is published under the twelfth section of this chapter,” at the close of §9, c. 124, Code 1923, are omitted because unnecessary and useless. Publication adds nothing to the validity of the service where a personal judgment is sought. It may be of value in attachment proceedings, but publication in such cases is fully covered in the attachment statutes.
§16. Execution of Process on Sunday.—No civil process or order shall be executed on Sunday, except in cases of persons escaping from custody, or where it may be specially provided by law.(Code 1849, c. 49, §26; Code 1860, c. 49, §25; Code 1868, c. 41, §15; 1881, c. 19, §15; Code 1923, c. 41, §15.)
§17. Where Process May be Executed.—Every officer by whom any process or order may be lawfully executed shall execute the same with in his bailiwick, or upon any river or creek ad joining thereto.(Code 1849, c. 49, §25; Code 1860, c. 49, §24; Code 1868, c. 41, §4; 1881, c. 19, §4; Code 1923, c. 41, §4.)
§18. Summoning Assistance.—Such officer may, in case resistance be made or apprehended to the execution of such process or order, summon to his assistance, either orally or by writing, so many of the male inhabitants of his county of the age of eighteen years or more, or require the commandant of any company, regiment or separate battalion of militia or volunteers to call out such portion, or the whole thereof, to assist him, as shall be deemed sufficient for the occasion; and he and those assisting him may use such force as shall be necessary or proper to overcome any resistance made to the execution of such process or order, and to seize, arrest and confine the resisters, their aiders and abettors, to be dealt with according to law. If any male inhabitant of the county of the age of eighteen years or more fail to obey such summons, or if any commandant fail to comply with such requisition, the officer shall report the fact to the court from which such process or order issued, which court may, in a summary way, after notice to the person so reported, adjudge him to be fined or imprisoned, or both, as for contempt. Or if the process or order was not issued by a court, the person so failing to obey such sum mons or requisition shall be punished as for a misdemeanor, and to that end the officer shall report him to the prosecuting attorney for the county.(Code 1849, c. 49, §25; Code 1860, c. 49, §24; Code 1868, c. 41, §5; 1881, c. 19, §5; Code 1923, c. 41, §5.)
§19. Service and Return of Process; Failure to Make Proper Return; False Return; Penalty.—Every officer to whom any process or order is lawfully delivered for execution shall, without avoidable delay, execute the same according to the command thereof and the provisions of law, and make true return thereon at the proper time and place, stating in such return the time and manner of executing the same, or why the same was not executed, and shall subscribe his name to such return. When the service is by deputy, such deputy shall subscribe to the return his own name as well as that of his principal. With the order or process there shall be returned any bond taken, and an account of any sale made under the same, specifying therein the several articles sold, the persons to whom sold, and the prices thereof. Such return shall be made to the court, justice, person or office from which such process or order issued, unless in such process or order it is directed to be otherwise returned, in which case return thereof shall be made according to such direction. Where a sale is made under any process or order, and no particular time for the return thereof is prescribed therein, or by law, the return shall be made within thirty days after the sale. But if no particular time be prescribed in the process or order, or by law, for the return thereof, and no sale is made under the same, the return shall be made immediately after such process or order is executed; or, if it be not executed, within two months after its date. Except when the process or order is issued by a justice, any officer failing to comply with the provisions of this section shall forfeit twenty dollars; and, if he make a false return, shall forfeit therefor one hundred dollars.(Code 1849, c. 49, §28; Code 1860, c. 49, §27; Code 1868, c. 41, §§6, 7, 8; 1881, c. 19, §§6, 7, 8; Code 1923, c. 41, §§6, 7, 8.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section comprises §§6, 7 and 8, c. 41, Code 1923, with the following changes: (a) The requirement that, where any sale is made, the account shall specify “the persons to whom sold,” is new, following in this respect §2825, Code Va. 1919; (b) the last sentence of §6, c. 41, Code 1923, is omitted. See revisers’ note to §13 of this article; (c) in the last sentence of the revised section, the words “the provisions of this section” are used instead of the words “either of the last two sections,” but the meaning is unchanged.
§20. Further Liability for Failure to Make Proper Return.—A judgment in a prosecution under the preceding section for failure to make proper return of any process or order, or to subscribe the return as aforesaid, shall be no bar to further proceedings if the failure be continued; but there shall be a further forfeiture by the officer, who ought to have made such return, of twenty dollars for every month subsequent to the judgment that the failure shall continue, until it appear that the return cannot be made; or if it be the case of an execution or warrant of distress, until it appear that the amount thereof has been paid to the party entitled. Moreover, the court to which, or to the clerk’s office of which, such return ought to be made, may, upon the motion of any party injured, and for his use, fine such officer and his sureties, or any one or more of them, or any deputy in default, a reasonable sum, and from time to time impose on him or them other reasonable fines, not exceeding altogether, in the case of an execution or warrant of distress, the rate of five dollars for every hundred dollars therein mentioned for each month that the failure to make such return shall have continued.(Code 1849, c. 49, §29; Code 1860, c. 49, §28; Code 1868, c. 41, §9; 1881, c. 19, §9; Code 1923, c. 41, §9.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “or order of sale” following “execution” are inserted in lieu of “or warrant of distress” in order to conform to the new procedure adopted in lieu of distress proceedings.
Committee’s Note.—The section is restored to its original form in conformity with similar changes made in art. 6, c. 37, restoring the distress proceeding.
§21. Alias Process.—If, at the return day of any process, it be not returned executed, an alias or other proper process may be issued without waiting (where the first process is returnable to a term) for the subsequent process to be awarded at rules. And where, for want of a return of the first process against a defendant, any subsequent process is issued, if the former was executed, the officer shall not execute the latter, but shall return the former if it be in his possession, and if he has it not, shall return the latter with an indorsement of the execution of the former, and the proceedings thereupon shall be as if the first had been duly returned.(Code 1849, c. 170, §3; Code 1860, c. 170, §3; Code 1868, c. 124, §3; 1882, c. 117, §3; Code 1923, c. 124, §3.)
Revisers’ Note.—See revisers’ note to §6059, Code Va. 1919; also Burks’ Pleading and Practice (2d ed.), pages 280 and 281, and note.
§22. Judgment on Return Nihil.—No judgment shall be rendered on a scire facias, or in any other case, on returns of nihil.(Code 1849, c. 170, §9; Code 1860, c. 170, §9; Code 1868, c. 124, §10; 1882, c. 117, §10; Code 1923, c. 124, §10.)
§23. Service by Publication.—On affidavit that a defendant is a foreign corporation for which no statutory attorney in fact, officer, director or agent is found in this State upon whom service may be had, or is not a resident of this State, or that diligence has been used by or on behalf of the plaintiff to ascertain in what county he is, without effect, or that process, directed to the officer of the county in which he resides or is, has twice been delivered to such officer more than ten days before the return day, and been returned without being executed, an order of publication may be entered against such defendant. And in any suit in equity, where the bill states that there are or may be persons interested in the subject to be divided or disposed of, whose names are unknown, and makes such persons defendants by the general description of parties unknown, on affidavit of the fact that such parties are unknown, an order of publication may be entered against such unknown parties. Any order of publication under this section may be entered either in court or by the clerk at any time. In a proceeding by petition, there may be an order of publication in like manner as in a suit in equity.(Code 1849, c. 170, §10; Code 1860, c. 170, §10; 1862-3, c. 27, §10; Code 1868, c. 124, §11; 1882, c. 117, §11; Code 1923, c. 124, §11.)
Revisers’ Note.—The following changes are made:, (a) The words “a foreign corporation for which no statutory attorney in fact, officer, director or agent is found in this State upon whom service may be had,” in the first sentence of the section, are new, being added to conform to §14 of this article. This change follows in part §6069, Code Va. 1919. (b) The provision of §11, c. 124, Code 1923, relating to publication where “the defendant is a corporation” is omitted, since it is no longer permitted where the defendant corporation is created by virtue of the laws of this State, the auditor being attorney in fact for it in all cases, and since it is permitted only in the instances already enumerated where the defendant is a foreign corporation, (c) The words “there are or may be” and “whose names are unknown” in the second sentence are new, following in this respect §6069, Code Va. 1919. (d) The words “parties” in that part of the second sentence reading, “on affidavit of the fact that such parties are unknown,” are used instead of “names.” (e) The words “of publication” after “order” in the third sentence are new, and the words “by the clerk thereof at any time” are inserted in lieu of “at the rules,” following in these respects said §6069.
§24. Contents of Order of Publication; Publishing.—Every order of publication shall give the style of the suit, state briefly its object, and require the defendants against whom it is entered, or the unknown parties, to appear with in one month after the date of the first publication thereof and do what is necessary to protect their interests. It shall be published once a week for three successive weeks in some newspaper published in the county in which the order is made or directed, if one is so published, to be designated by the party directing such order or his attorney, but if no paper be so designated, then in such paper as the court may direct, or if the court make no direction, then as the clerk of the court may prescribe; and if no newspaper be published in the county, or if none therein will publish the order at the legal rate or for the time required, then in such newspaper of general circulation in the county as the court may prescribe, or, if none be so prescribed, as the clerk may direct. It shall be deemed to have been published on the day of the third publication thereof.(Code 1849, c. 170, §11; Code 1860, c. 170, §11; 1863, c. 29, §11; Code 1868, c. 124, §12; 1872-3, c. 153, §12; 1882, c. 117, §12; 1911, c. 49, §12; Code 1923, c. 124, §12.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “give the style of the suit” in the first sentence are new, following in substance in this respect §6070, Code Va. 1919. In the same sentence the word “defendants” is used instead of “defendant.” In the second sentence “circuit” is omitted before “court,” in order that the section may apply to all nisi prius courts of record. In the same sentence, following the semicolon, the words “or if none therein will publish the order at the legal rate or for the time required” are taken in substance from §15, c. 138, Code 1923, and inserted here in order to provide for the contingency stated. The period of publication is reduced from four to three weeks, and posting of the order of publication is no longer required.
§25. Failure to Appear in Response to Publication; Trial or Hearing; Personal Service Outside State.—When such order shall have been so published, if the defendants against whom it is entered, or the unknown parties, shall not appear within the time specified in such order, the case may be tried or heard as to them at the next term of the court commencing not less than one month after the date of the first publication. Personal service of a summons, scire facias or notice may be made on a nonresident defendant out of this State, which service shall have the same effect, and no other, as an order of publication, duly published against him. In such case the return shall be made under oath and shall show the time and place of such service, and that the defendant so served is a nonresident of this State. Upon any trial or hearing under this section, such judgment, decree or order shall be entered as may appear just.(Code 1849, c. 170, §12; Code 1860, c. 170, §12; Code 1868, c. 124, §13; 1869, c. 133; 1882, c, 117, §13; Code 1923, c. 124, §13.)
Revisers’ Note.—All references to posting are omitted. In the first sentence, the words “within the time specified in such order” and “at the next term of the court,” continuing to the end of the sentence, are added to make it clear that the cause may be heard at the next term of court after the completion of the publication, provided the term commences after the expiration of the month specified in the order for the appearance of the defendants proceeded against by publication. Where a defendant is served with process, two rules must elapse before the cause is matured and placed up on the docket for hearing. For the same reason, the revised section requires that a similar period of one month must elapse after the first publication before a cause is matured for hearing as to a defendant proceeded against by order of publication. See Higginbotham v. Hazelden, 3 W. Va. 266.
§26. Rehearing in Case of Non-Person Service.—Any unknown party or other defendant who was not served with process in this State, and did not appear in the case before the date of such judgment, decree or order, or the representative of such, may, within two years from that date, if he be not served with a copy of such judgment, decree or order more than eight months before the end of such two years, and if he was so served, then within eight months from the time of such service, file his petition to have the proceedings reheard in the manner and form provided by section forty-three, article seven, chapter thirty-eight of this Code, and not otherwise; and all the provisions of that section are hereby made applicable to proceedings under this section.(Code 1849, c. 170, §13; Code 1860, c. 170, §13; 1865, c. 92, §13; Code 1868, c. 124, §14; 1870, c. 109, §14; 1871, c. 167, §14; 1882, c. 117, §14; 1909, c. 42, §14; Code 1923, c. 124, §14.)
Revisers’ Note.—The last sentence of §14, c. 124, Code 1923, is omitted, being no longer necessary. The words “eight months,” appearing twice, are inserted in lieu of “one year.”
§27. Order of Publication in Supreme Court of Appeals.—When, by the return of any officer of process issued to answer any appeal, writ of error or supersedeas pending in the supreme court of appeals of this State, or when, from affidavit filed with the clerk of said court, it shall appear that any appellee or defendant in error therein is a foreign corporation for which no statutory attorney in fact, officer, director or agent is found in this State upon whom service may be had, or is not a resident of this State, or that the name or place of residence of such party is unknown, so that process can not be served upon him, it shall be the duty of such clerk, upon application, to take and issue, on the first Monday in any month, an order of publication against such absent or unknown party or foreign corporation, requiring him or it to appear on a day to be designated in such order, to answer such appeal, writ of error or supersedeas and to have a rehearing of the whole matter therein contained.(1863, c. 84, §1; Code 1868, c. 124, §15; 1882, c. 117, §15; 1883, c. 49, §15; Code 1923, c. 124, §15.)
Revisers’ Note.—The following changes are made: (a) “Writ of error” is inserted between “appeal” and “supersedeas.” (b) The words “now pending or which may be hereafter pending” are omitted after first “supersedeas,” and the word ‘‘pending” used instead, (c) “Affidavit” is used instead of “affidavits.” (d) The words “in error” are inserted after “defendant.” (e) The word “therein” is used instead of words “in any such appeal or supersedeas.” (f) The provision relating to foreign corporations is new, corresponding in this respect to §23 of this article, (g) “Name,” “place,” “is” and “him” are used instead of the plural forms, (h) The words “where such service may be necessary” are omitted after “him.” (i) It is made the “duty” of the clerk to take and issue an order of publication instead of “lawful for” him to do so. (j) The words “certain” before “day” and “then and there” before “to answer” are omitted.
§28. Requisites of Publication in Such Court.—Such order of publication shall be entered by the clerk in a suitable book kept by him for the purpose and signed by him, and a certified copy of such order shall be inserted once a week for three successive weeks in some newspaper to be named therein; and when it shall appear that such order of publication has been duly published as aforesaid, the court may proceed to hear and decide such cause in the same, manner as if such parties had been personally, served with process: Provided, however, That the order of publication shall have been executed, as aforesaid, at least ten days before the day on which any such cause may be called for hearing.(1863, c. 84, §2; Code 1868, c. 124, §16; 1882, 4, c. 117, §16; 1883, c. 49, §16; Code 1923, c. 124, §16.)
Revisers’ Note.—The time for publication is reduced from four to three weeks and the requirement for posting is omitted. The time in the proviso is reduced from thirty to ten days, following in this respect §6073, Code Va. 1919.
§29. Rehearing in Supreme Court.—Any unknown party or other defendant who was not served with process in this State, and did not appear in the cause, may have the same reheard and any injustice in the proceedings corrected within the time prescribed by section twenty-six of this article.(1863, c. 84, §3; Code 1868, c. 124, §17; 1882, c. 117, §17; Code 1923, c. 124, §17.)
§30. Day of Publication.—Any publication authorized or required by any law of this State, or by the provisions of any deed of trust, to be made not more than once a week in any newspaper, may be published in a newspaper issued on any day of the week.(1881, c. 64, §1; Code 1923, c. 124A, §1.)
Article 4. Rules and Pleading.
Revisers’ Note.—Sections 18 and 56, c. 125, Code 1923, are omitted from this Code for reasons stated in the revisers’ notes to §§34 and 36, respectively, of this article.
§1. Rule Days.—In the clerk’s office of every circuit court, rules shall be held on the first Monday of every month, whether the court be in session or not, except that when a term of the circuit court commences on the first Monday in a month, or on either of the two following days, or on the preceding Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday or Saturday, the rules which otherwise would have been held for such month on the first Monday shall be held on the last Monday in the next preceding month. The rules shall continue for three days, unless such continuance will interfere with the term of the court for which the rules are held, in which case they shall not continue beyond the day preceding the commencement of the term of such court. But if any Monday which is a rule day shall also be a holiday, then rules shall be held on the following Tuesday regardless of the fact that the latter day may be the first day of a term of court.(Code 1849, c. 171, §1; 1857-58, c. 65, §1; 1859-60, c. 80, §1; Code 1860, c. 171, §1; Code 1868, c. 125, §1; 1871, c. 33, §1; 1882, c. 71, §1; Code 1923, c. 125, §1.)
Revisers’ Note.—The following changes are made: (a) The clause “except where a different provision is made by law,” formerly in the first sentence of the section, is omitted. (b) The words “whether the court be in session or not,” while new, being taken from §6074, Code Va. 1919, do not change the law. See Abney v. Ohio Lumber & Mining Co., 45 W. Va. 446, 453, and revisers’ note to the Virginia section referred to. (c) “Shall” is inserted instead of “may,” following in this respect the Virginia section referred to. (d) “Unless” is used instead of the words “but when in any case” to improve the diction. (e) “Term” is used instead of “terms,” as the former is clearly intended. (f) The last sentence of the section is new, being added to meet the situation presented in Bennett v. Fire Association, 78 W. Va. 654.
§2. Rule Docket.—There shall be a docket of the cases at rules wherein the rules shall be entered; and the books in which rules and orders are entered in chancery cases shall be separate from those in which rules and orders are entered in other cases.(Code 1849, c. 171, §2; Code 1860, c. 171, §2; Code 1868, c. 125, §3; 1882, c. 71, §3; Code 1923, c. 125, §3.)
§3. Rule Entries.—Where rules are held on the last Monday in a month, as provided in section one of this article, they shall be entered in the rule docket and indorsed on the declaration or bill as if taken on the first Monday in the month to which they relate.(1882, c. 71, §2; Code 1923, c. 125, §2.)
§4. Continuance at Rules in Absence of Clerk.—When there is no clerk to take a rule in a case, it shall stand continued until the next rule day after there is a clerk.(Code 1849, c. 171, §3; Code 1860, c. 171, §3; Code 1868, c. 125, §4; 1882, c. 71, §4; Code 1923, c. 125, §4.)
§5. What Rules May Require.—The rules may be to declare, plead, reply, rejoin, or for other proceedings; they shall be given from month to month.(Code 1849, c. 171, §4; Code 1860, c. 171, §4; Code 1868, c. 125, §5; 1882, c. 71, §5; Code 1923, c. 125, §5.)
§6. Time for Appearance; Rule to File Declaration; Nonsuit for Non-Prosecution; Damages.—A defendant may appear at the rule day at which the process against him is returnable, or, if it be returnable in term, at the first rule day after the return day, and, if the declaration or bill be not then filed, may give a rule for the plaintiff to file the same. If the plaintiff fail to do this at the succeeding rule day, or shall, at any time after the defendant’s appearance, fail to prosecute his suit, he shall be nonsuited and pay to the defendant, besides his costs, five dollars.(Code 1849, c. 171, §5; Code 1860, c. 171, §5; Code 1868, c. 125, §6; 1882, c. 71, §6; Code 1923, c. 125, §6.)
Revisers’ Note.—The only change is the substitution of “costs” for “cost.”
§7. Dismissal for Failure to File Declaration , or Bill.—If three rules elapse after the rules at which the process is returned executed as to any one or more of the defendants, without the declaration or bill being filed, the clerk shall enter the suit dismissed, although none of the defendants have appeared.(Code 1849, c. 171, §6; Code 1860, c. 171, §6; Code 1868, c. 125, §7; 1882, c. 71, §7; Code 1923, c. 125, §7.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 7, c. 125, Code 1923, allowed three “months,” after the process was returned executed, within which the plaintiff might file his declaration or bill. This period was computed from the date of the return of the process executed to a corresponding date in the third succeeding month. Wilson v. Fleming, 89 W. Va. 553. As the latter date might precede the first rule day of that month, the plaintiff might lose the benefit of nearly all the third month allowed by the statute. Hence it is deemed better to compute the time by rules rather than by months.
§8. Return to Show Defendant’s Nonresidence; Abatement as to Nonresident Not on Served.—When a summons to a party to answer an action or bill is received by an officer who knows that such party is not a resident of his county, or not a resident of the State, he shall, unless he find him in his county on or before the return day, make a return that he is a nonresident of the county and/or State, as the case may be; whereupon, if the court from which such process issued have jurisdiction of the case only on the ground of such defendant’s residence in such county, the action or suit shall abate as to him; and if he be returned a nonresident of the State, and the court have jurisdiction of the case only on the ground that the cause of action arose in the county, the action or suit shall abate as to him.(Code 1849, c. 171, §7; Code 1860, c. 171, §7; Code 1868, c. 125, §8; 1882, c. 71, §8; Code 1923, c. 125, §8.)
Revisers’ Note.—The first part of §8, c. 125, Code 1923, is redrafted without change in substance, except that the officer’s return is made more specific.
§9. Minors May Sue by Next Friend or Guardian; Substitution of Plaintiffs.—Any minor entitled to sue may do so by his next friend or guardian. When the action or suit is brought by his next friend, the court may, for good cause, substitute the guardian in lieu of the next friend, or any other person as the next friend.(Code 1849, c. 127, §12; Code 1860, c. 127, §14; Code 1868, c. 82, §14; 1872-3, c. 149, §14; Code 1923, c. 82, §14.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 14, c. 82, Code 1923, is transferred to this article and materially amended. All words following “friend” in the first sentence are new. Originally the section authorized an infant to sue by next friend. The guardian could not sue on behalf of the infant. See Lemon v. Hansbarger, 6 Grat. 301; Sillings v. Bumgardner, 9 Grat. 273; Burdett v. Cain, 8 W. Va. 282. This resulted often in difficulties, for in case of recovery the next friend could not collect the judgment or settle with the defendant. 1 Min. Inst. (4th ed.) 504; Fletcher v. Parker, 53 W. Va. 422. Therefore the section is amended so as to authorize a minor to sue by his next friend or guardian. It also provides for the substitution of the guardian in lieu of the next friend, or of any other person as next friend.
§10. Guardian Ad Litem.—The proceedings in a suit wherein an infant or insane person is a party shall not be stayed because of such infancy or insanity, but the court in which the suit is pending, or the judge thereof in vacation, or the clerk thereof at rules, shall appoint some discreet and competent attorney at law as guardian ad litem to such infant or insane defendant, whether such defendant shall have been served with process or not, and after such appointment no process need be served on such infant or insane person. If no such attorney be found willing to act, the court, or the judge thereof in vacation, may compel him to act, or appoint some other discreet and proper person in his stead; but the attorney or other person so appointed shall not be liable for costs. Every guardian ad litem shall faithfully represent the interest or estate of the infant or insane person for whom he is appointed, and it shall be the duty of the court to see that the estate of such defendant is so represented and protected. And the court, or the judge thereof in vacation, whenever of opinion that the interest of an infant or insane person requires it, shall remove any guardian ad litem and appoint another in his stead. When, in any case, the court or judge is satisfied that the guardian ad litem has rendered substantial service to the estate of an infant or insane defendant, it may allow him reasonable compensation therefor, and his actual expenses, if any, to be paid out of the estate of such defendant.(Code 1849, c. 171, §16; Code 1860, c. 171, §16; Code 1868, c. 125, §13; 1882, c. 71, §13; Code 1923, c. 125, §13.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section follows closely §6098, Code Va. 1919. The changes are intended to provide a system whereby the rights of infants may be fully protected. Note, however, that the compensation of a guardian ad litem is to be paid out of defendant’s estate, instead of by the party on whose motion he was appointed, as formerly required by §13, c. 125, Code 1923.
§11. Transfer of Cases From Law to Equity and Vice Versa.—No case shall be dismissed simply because it was brought on the wrong side of the court, but whenever it shall appear that a plaintiff has proceeded at law when he should have proceeded in equity, or in equity when he should have proceeded at law, the court shall direct a transfer to the proper forum, and shall order such change in, or amendment of, the pleadings as may be necessary to conform them to the proper practice; and, without such direction, any party to the suit shall have the right, at any stage of the cause, to amend his pleadings so as to obviate the objection that his suit or action was not brought on the right side of the court. After such amendment has been made, the case shall be placed by the clerk on the proper docket of the court and proceed and be determined upon such amended pleadings. The defendant shall be allowed a reasonable time after such transfer in which to prepare the case for trial.
Revisers’ Note.—This section is new and is taken verbatim from Code Va. 1919, §6084, which follows in part §1251a, U. S. Compiled Statutes 1916.
§12. Abatement for Want of Form in Declaration.—No action shall abate for want of form, where the declaration sets forth sufficient matter of substance for the court to proceed upon the merits of the case.(Code 1849, c. 171, §11; Code 1860, c. 171, §11; Code 1868, c. 125, §9; 1882, c. 71, §9; Code 1923, c. 125, §9.)
§13. Unnecessary Averments in Trespass on the Case.—In actions of trespass on the case, where the action of trespass would formerly have been proper, general averments that the defendant committed other wrongs, and that the acts charged were done with force and arms against the peace, may be omitted; and the plaintiff may prove all that he could have proved if such averments had been inserted in the declaration.(Code 1849, c. 171, §12; Code 1860, c. 171, §12; Code 1868, c. 125, §10; 1882, c. 71, §10; Code 1923, c. 125, §10.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 10, c. 125, Code 1923, is modified in view of the abolishing of the action of trespass. See §10, art. 7, c. 55. Said § 10 might well have been omitted under the circumstances but is retained to prevent any possibility of doubt. The word “proved” is inserted in lieu of “done.”
§14. Allegations of Place Where Contract Was Made or Act Done.—It shall not be necessary in any declaration or other pleading to set forth the place in which any contract was made, or act done, unless when, from the nature of the case, the place is material or traversable, and then the allegation may be, as to a deed, note or other writing bearing date at any place, that it was made at such place, or as to any other act, according to the fact, without averring or suggesting that it was at or in the county in which the action is brought, unless it was in fact therein.(Code 1849, c. 171, §8; Code 1860, c. 171, §8; Code 1868, c. 125, §32; 1882, c. 71, §32; Code 1923, c. 125, §32.)
§15. Averments as to Jurisdiction; Profert; Oyer.—It shall not be necessary in any action to aver that the cause of action arose, or that the matter is, within the jurisdiction of the court, or to make profert of any deed, letters testamentary, or commission of administration; but any party may have oyer in like manner as if profert were made.(Code 1849, c. 171, §9; Code 1860, c. 171, §9; Code 1868, c. 125, §33; 1882, c. 71, §33; Code 1923, c. 125, §33.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “any party” are used in lieu of “a defendant” so as to permit the plaintiff in a proper case to have oyer.
§16. Allegations Not Traversable Nor Requiring Proof.—All allegations which are not traversable, and which the party could not be required to prove, may be omitted, unless they are required for the right understanding of allegations that are material.(Code 1849, c. 171, §10; Code 1860, c. 171, §10; Code 1868, c. 125, §34; 1882, c. 71, §34; Code 1923, c. 125, §34.)
§17. Actions on Insurance Policies; Declaration.—A declaration or count on a policy of insurance, whether the policy be under seal or not, may be in effect as follows:
If the declaration or count be on a life policy, then it shall be sufficient to follow the above form in effect down to and including the word, “plaintiff,” and add thereto in effect as follows:
Because of the death of E. F., whose life was insured by said policy, and who died on or about the.........day of..........., in the year........., at (or near to, stating the place where his death occurred) .............; or, if the fact be so, the plaintiff may state in the declaration or count that the time or place where the loss or death occurred is unknown to him, giving in general terms such information as may be in his power in respect thereto. Nothing contained in this section shall render insufficient in law any declaration or count which would be sufficient if this section had not been passed.(1877, c. 66, §1; 1882, c. 71, §61; Code 1923, c. 125, §61.)
§18. Filing Account in Assumpsit.—In every action of assumpsit the plaintiff shall file with his declaration an account stating distinctly the several items of his claim, unless it be plainly described in the declaration, and if he fail to do so, he shall not be permitted on the trial of the case to prove any item not stated in such account.(Code 1849, c. 171, §13; Code 1860, c. 171, §13; Code 1868, c. 125, §11; 1882, c. 71, §11; Code 1923, c. 125, §11.)
§19. Statement of Particulars of Claim.—In any action or motion, if good cause therefor be shown or appear, the court or judge in vacation may order the plaintiff to file a more particular statement, in any respect, of the nature of his claim, or the facts expected to be proved at the trial, and may stay the action until a reasonable time after such order is complied with; and such statement must be made under the oath of the plaintiff, or some other credible person, to the effect that the affiant believes the same will be supported by evidence at the trial. But no such order shall be made if it appear that there has been unreasonable delay on the part of the defendant in applying therefor.(1877, c. 66, §2; 1882, c. 71, §62; Code 1923, c. 125, §62.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section, as well as the four succeeding sections, is transferred from its position of limited application among the statutes relating to actions on insurance policies at the close of c. 125, Code 1923, and broadened to cover all actions and motions. As its provisions and those of the succeeding section are more comprehensive than those of §46, c. 130, Code 1923, the latter is omitted from this Code. The words “or some other credible person” are used in lieu of the words “his officer, agent or attorney at law.”
§20. Statement of Particulars of Defense.—In like manner, if good cause therefor appear, and there be no unreasonable delay on the part of the plaintiff in applying for such order, the court or judge in vacation may order the defendant to file a more particular statement, in any respect, of the nature of his defense, or the facts expected to be proved at the trial, which statement shall be made under the oath of the defendant, or some other credible person, to the effect that the affiant believes the same will be supported by evidence at the trial.(1877, c. 66, §3; 1882, c. 71, §63; Code 1923, c. 125, §63.)
Revisers’ Note.—See revisers’ note to preceding section.
§21. Plea in Action on Insurance Policy; Statement Specifying Particular Defense.—To any declaration or count on a policy of insurance, whether the same be in the form prescribed by section seventeen of this article or not, and whether the action be covenant, debt or assumpsit, the defendant may plead that he is not liable to the plaintiff as in said declaration is alleged. But if in any action on a policy of insurance, the defense be that the action cannot be maintained because of the failure to perform or comply with, or violation of, any clause, condition or warranty in, upon or annexed to the policy or contained in or upon any paper which is made by reference a part of the policy, the defendant must file a statement in writing specifying by reference thereto, or otherwise, the particular clause, condition or warranty in respect to which such failure or violation is claimed to have occurred, and such statement must be verified by the oath of the defendant, or some other credible person, to the effect that the affiant believes the matter of defense therein stated will be supported by evidence at the trial.(1877, c. 66, §4; 1882, c. 71, §64; Code 1923, c. 125, §64.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section, unlike the two preceding sections, is limited in application to actions on insurance policies, but, like them, it is transferred to its present position from the end of chapter 125, Code 1923, in order to group all sections relating to the particularizing of claims and defenses. See revisers’ note to §19 of this article.
§22. Same; Joinder in Issue; Statement Specifying Matter in Waiver, Estoppel, or Confession and Avoidance.—Upon the plea mentioned in the next preceding section, the plaintiff may join issue without other pleading. But if the plaintiff intends to rely upon any matter in waiver, estoppel, or in confession and avoidance of any matter which may have been stated by the defendant as aforesaid, the plaintiff must file a statement in writing, specifying in general terms the matter on which he intends so to rely; and such statement must be verified by the oath of the plaintiff, or some other credible person, to the effect that the affiant believes the matter of reply therein stated will be supported by evidence at the trial.(1877, c. 66, §5; 1882, c. 71, §65; Code 1923, c. 125, §65.)
Revisers’ Note.—See revisers’ note to preceding section.
§23. Failure to File Statement; Insufficient Statement; Amendment; Exclusion of Evidence of Party in Default; Sufficiency of Statement.—If either party to such action or motion fail to file any statement required of him by the four preceding sections of this article, or by the other party pursuant to any of the provisions of the said sections, or if the statement be adjudged insufficient in whole or in part, the court, as justice may require, may grant further time for filing the same, or permit the statement filed to be amended, or may, at the trial, exclude the evidence offered by the party in default as to any matter which he has so failed to state or has insufficiently stated, and which is not described in the notice, declaration or other pleading of such party so plainly as to give the adverse party notice of its character. But no statement which, in the particulars required by or under the said sections to be stated or referred to therein, is sufficient to notify the adverse party, in effect, of the nature of the claim or defense intended to be set up against him, shall be adjudged insufficient.(1877, c. 66, §6; 1882, c. 71, §66; Code 1923, c. 125, §66.)
Revisers’ Note.—See revisers’ notes to §§19 and 21 of this article. The words “or motion” after “action” in the first line of this section are new, being added to conform to §19 of this article. The words “and which is not described in the notice, declaration or other pleading of such party so plainly as to give the adverse party notice of its character” are taken from §46, c. 130, Code 1923, and here inserted to express a thought contained therein which is not clearly stated in §66, c. 125, Code 1923.
§24. Right to Amend in General.—The plaintiff may of right amend his declaration or bill at any time before the appearance of the defendant; and, notwithstanding such appearance, in any action, suit, motion or other proceeding, the court, if in its opinion substantial justice will be promoted thereby, may, at any time before final judgment or decree, and upon such terms as it may deem just, permit any pleading to be amended, or material supplemental matter to be set forth in amended or supplemental pleadings, introducing a necessary party, discontinuing as to a party, eliminating from a multifarious bill all but one of the equitable causes of action alleged, or changing the form but not the cause of action, except that no proceeding by motion shall be converted by amendment into a formal action at law, or vice versa, and the court may allow any other amendment in matter of form or substance in any process which is not void, pleading or proceeding, which may enable the plaintiff to sustain the action, suit, motion or proceeding for the cause for which it was intended to be brought, or enable the defendant to make full and complete defense.(Code 1849, c. 171, §14; Code 1860, c. 171, §14; Code 1868, c. 125, §12; 1882, c. 71, §12; 1911, c. 41, §12; Code 1923, c. 125, §12.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is substantially new. The first two lines, down to the semicolon, are taken from the first sentence of §12, c. 125, Code 1923. The rest of the section is new and embraces material portions of §6104, Code Va. 1919, and of §51, c. 231, General Laws of Massachusetts 1921. The following changes are made: (a) The words “and notwithstanding such appearance” are taken from §6095, Code Va. 1919. (b) The words “or decree” are inserted to embrace equitable as well as legal causes. (c) The words “eliminating from a multifarious bill all but one of the equitable causes of action alleged” change the law as expressed in the following decisions: County Court v. Hope Natural Gas Company, 80 W. Va. 486; Bennett v. Clay County Bank, 80 W. Va. 554; Cecil v. Karnes, 61 W. Va. 543; Shaffer v. Fetty, 30 W. Va. 248. (d) The words “but not the cause” are inserted for the purpose of emphasis and to conform to court decisions. (e) The words “except that no proceeding by motion shall be converted by amendment into a formal action at law, or vice versa” are inserted for obvious reasons. (f) The words “which is not void” are added to forbid the amendment of void process. (g) The words “suit, motion or proceeding” are added to conform to preceding provisions of the section. (h) The words “full and complete” are used in order to emphasize the right of the defendant to amend.
§25. Amended Declaration or Bill, Supplemental Bill, or Bill of Revivor, in Vacation.—The plaintiff may also, at any time before or after the appearance of the defendant, in vacation of the court wherein the action or suit is pending, file in the clerk’s office an amended declaration or bill, supplemental bill or bill of revivor in such suit; whereupon the clerk shall issue a summons against the defendant, requiring him to plead to or answer such amended declaration or bill. But if the court shall be of the opinion that the same was improperly filed, it shall dismiss such declaration or bill at the cost of the plaintiff.(Code 1849, c. 171, §14; Code 1860, c. 171, §14; Code 1868, c. 125, §12; 1882, c. 71, §12; 1911, c. 41, §12; Code 1923, c. 125, §12.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section embraces the last two sentences of §12, c. 125, Code 1923, with unimportant changes.
§26. Amendment After Demurrer Sustained.—If a demurrer be sustained to a declaration or bill, the plaintiff, upon giving notice to the defendant or defendants who have appeared or to their counsel, may file an amended declaration or bill at any time within the term at which the demurrer was sustained; and thereupon the cause shall proceed as if such amended pleading had been filed at the time when the original declaration or bill was filed; but the court shall allow the defendant a reasonable time to plead to or answer such amended declaration or bill. The plaintiff may, if he so elect, have the cause remanded to rules for amendment.(1911, c. 41, §12; Code 1923, c. 125, §12.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section embraces the second and fourth full sentences of §12, c. 125, Code 1923. The third sentence of said §12 relating to continuance after amendment is omitted here, but is included in a separate section covering continuances generally after amendment. See §28 of this article.
§27. Amendment to Cure Variance Between Pleading and Proof.—If at the trial of any action or motion, there appears to be a variance between the evidence and allegations or recitals, the court, if in its opinion substantial justice will be promoted thereby, may allow the pleadings to be amended to conform to the proof.(Code 1849, c. 177, §7; Code 1860, c. 177, §7; Code 1868, c. 131, §8; 1882, c. 120, §8; Code 1923, c. 131, §8.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section comprises part of §8, c. 131, Code 1923, broadened to permit amendment of motions, following in this respect §6250, Code Va. 1919. The words “to conform to the proof” are added merely to express what has always been understood. The part of said §8 relating to continuance and costs is transferred to the next succeeding section.
§28. Continuance and Costs After Amendment.—If substantial amendment of any pleading is made, the court shall enter such order as to continuance as shall seem fair and just. But the trial of an action at law shall not be continued to another term because of the filing of an amended declaration, or because of an amendment made for the purpose of curing a variance between pleading and proof, unless the defendant shall satisfy the court by affidavit or otherwise that because of such amendment he cannot safely proceed with the trial without such continuance. Every continuance to a subsequent term granted because of an amendment of a pleading shall be at the costs of the party making the amendment.(Code 1849, c. 171, §14, c. 177, §7; Code 1860, c. 171, §14, c. 177, §7: Code 1868, c. 125. §12, c. 131. §8: 1882. c. 71. §12, c. 120, §8; 1911, c. 41, §12; Code 1923, c. 125, §12, c. 131, §8.)
Revisers’ Note.—The first sentence is taken in substance from §6104, Code Va. 1919. The second sentence combines the continuance provisions of §12, c. 125, and §8, c. 131, Code 1923. The last sentence applies the rule laid down in §8, c. 131, to all continuances to a subsequent term.
§29. Misnomer; Amendment.—No plea in abatement for a misnomer shall be allowed in any action; but in a case wherein, but for this section, a misnomer would have been pleadable in abatement, the declaration and summons may, on the motion of either party, and on affidavit of the correct name, be amended by inserting the correct name.(Code 1849, c. 171, §17; Code 1860, c. 171, §17; Code 1868, c. 125, §14; 1882, c. 71, §14; Code 1923, c. 125, §14.)
Revisers’ Note.—The first “correct” is inserted in lieu of “right,” and the words “correct name” at the end of the section are inserted in lieu of “same therein.” See also §6101, Code Va. 1919.
§30. Plea in Abatement for Defects in Writ or Return; Variance from Declaration; Void Process.—In other cases, a defendant on whom process summoning him to answer in any suit or action appears to have been served shall not take advantage of any defect in the writ or return, or any variance in the writ from the declaration, unless such defect or such variance be pleaded in abatement. And in the case of every such defect or such variance, whether the same shall be pleaded in abatement or not, the court may at any time permit the plaintiff to amend the writ or the declaration so as to perfect the writ or correct the variance, and may permit the return to be amended, upon such terms as to it shall seem just. But nothing herein shall deprive a defendant of any right which he has by the common law to make a motion to quash process which is void; and if the process be a void process, the suit or action shall be dismissed upon motion of the defendant.(Code 1849, c. 171, §18; Code 1860, c. 171, §18; Code 1868, c. 125, §15; 1882, c. 71, §15; Code 1923, c. 125, §15.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “in any suit or action” are added to make plain the scope of the section, and the words “such defect or such variance” are substituted for “the same” in order to make the provision more explicit. The words “the case of every such defect or such variance” are substituted for “every such case,” in order to eliminate the ambiguity in the latter phrase and to make it plain that process may be amended, not only with reference to variances from the declaration, but also with reference to defects in the writ, bearing in mind that the supreme court has said: “Sections 14 and 15 of chapter 125 of the Code provide for the correction of misnomers and variances in the writ and nothing more. Hence, it is probable that they are merely declaratory of the common law * * * .” Fisher v. Crowley, 57 W. Va. 312, 318. The words “perfect the writ or” are added in order further to accomplish this object and to insure that the writ may be amended so as to cure defects within the writ itself. The words “whether the same shall be pleaded in abatement or not” are added to make it plain that the fact that the defect or variance has been pleaded in abatement shall not, as asserted in Laidley’s Admr. v. Bright’s Admr., 17 W. Va. 779, be a condition precedent to authority of the court to permit an amendment. The words “at any time” are added to remove any doubt as to the time when the amendment may be permitted, and particularly to authorize an amendment when a motion to set aside a judgment or decree is made under c. 134, Code 1923. The first part of the last sentence is added in order to make an express term of the statute the judicial construction adopted in such cases as Kyles v. Ford, 2 Rand. (Va.) 1; Coda v. Thompson, 39 W. Va. 67; Fisher v. Crowley, 57 W. Va. 312; Netter-Oppenheimer & Co. v. Elfant, 63 W. Va. 99. The remainder of the last sentence is taken in part from §6103, Code Va. 1919. The adoption of this sentence as part of the section may result in changing the rule of decision in Danser v. Mallonee, 77 W. Va. 26, in which the court permitted a special appearance for the purpose of moving to quash a process (attachment and order of publication in that case), but held that an additional motion to dismiss the case from the docket, made after the court had sustained the motion to quash, amounted to a general appearance. For a general discussion of this section, see 29 W. Va. Law Quarterly 229, et seq.
§31. Plea in Abatement for Want of Jurisdiction.—Where the declaration or bill shows on its face proper matter for the jurisdiction of the court, no exception for want of such jurisdiction shall be allowed unless it be taken by plea in abatement.(Code 1849, c. 171, §19; Code 1860, c. 171, §19; Code 1868, c. 125, §16; 1882, c. 71, §16; 1903, c. 10, §16; Code 1923, c. 125, §16.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section comprises the first half of the first sentence of §16, c. 125, Code 1923. The second half of the first sentence of said §16, relating to the time for filing pleas in abatement, is incorporated in §33 of this article. The last sentence of said §16, relating to verification of pleas in abatement, is combined with §39, c. 125, Code 1923, to form §32 of this article.
§32. Verification of Plea in Abatement and of Non Est Factum; Plea in Abatement May be Pleaded and Verified by Attorney or Agent of Defendant.—No plea in abatement or plea of non est factum shall be received unless it be verified by affidavit. And in all cases, including those wherein the defendant is a corporation, the plea in abatement may be pleaded and verified by the attorney or agent of the defendant.(Code 1849, c. 171, §37; Code 1860, c. 171, §37; Code 1868, c. 125, §39; 1882, c. 71, §39; 1903, c. 10, §16; Code 1923, c. 125, §§16, 39.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is a composite. The first sentence is taken verbatim from §39, c. 125, Code 1923. The second sentence is taken from the final sentence of §16, c. 125, Code 1923, relating to pleas in abatement for want of jurisdiction. It is transferred to this section in order that it may apply to all pleas in abatement, and not merely to those coming within the scope of said §16, and is broadened so as to include the making as well as the verification of the plea in abatement.
§33. Time for Filing Plea in Abatement.—No plea in abatement shall be received after the defendant has demurred, pleaded in bar, or answered to the declaration or bill, or later than the next succeeding rules after the rules at which a rule to plead or a conditional judgment or decree nisi is entered.(Code 1849, c. 171, §19; Code 1860, c. 171, §19; Code 1868, c. 125, §16; 1882, c. 71, §16; 1903, c. 10, §16; Code 1923, c. 125, §16.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is modeled in part after the last half of the first complete sentence of §16, c. 125, Code 1923. The words “no plea in abatement” are new. They cover all pleas in abatement, and not merely pleas in abatement for want of jurisdiction, as in said §16. The word “demurred” is also new, following in this respect §6105, Code Va. 1919. Since a demurrer constitutes a general appearance the same as a plea in bar, no reason is perceived why the one should not have the same effect as the other with reference to the filing of a plea in abatement. See also Burlew v. Smith, 68 W. Va. 458, 460.
§34. Misjoinder and Nonjoinder of Parties.—No action or suit shall abate or be defeated by the misjoinder or nonjoinder of parties, plaintiff or defendant. Whenever such misjoinder shall be made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the parties misjoined shall be dropped by order of the court, entered of its own accord or upon motion, at any stage of the cause. Whenever in any case full justice can not be done and a complete and final determination of the controversy can not be had without the presence of other parties, and such nonjoinder shall be made to appear by affidavit or otherwise at any time before final judgment or decree, the court of its own accord, or upon motion, may cause such omitted persons to be made parties to the action or suit, as plaintiffs or defendants, by proper amendment and process, at any stage of the cause, as the ends of justice may require, and upon such terms as may appear to the court to be just; but no new party shall be added upon motion unless the place of his residence, if known, be stated with convenient certainty in the affidavit of the party questioning his nonjoinder, and, if his place of residence be not known, unless such fact be stated.(Code 1849, c. 171, §§20, 22; Code 1860, c. 171, §§20, 22; Code 1868, c. 125, §§17, 19, 58; 1882, c. 71, §§17, 19, 58; Code 1923, c. 125, §§17, 19, 58.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is a redraft of §§17, 58 and the first part of §19, c. 125, Code 1923. It dispenses with pleas in abatement for nonjoinder of parties. The residue of said §19 is covered in §35 of this article. The first sentence of the section is taken verbatim from §6102, Code Va. 1919. The second sentence also is taken from that section, but limited to misjoinder of parties, with the following changes: (a) “Shall” is used instead of “may” because, in construing the statute in force in Virginia before the revision of 1919, the word “may” was held to mean “shall.” Lee v. Mut. Reserve Fund Ass’n., 97 Va. 160, 33 S. E. 556; Burks’ Pleading & Practice (2d ed.), page 63, note 87. And Judge Burks intimates that the 1919 revision did not affect the holding in the case cited; (b) The words “entered of its own accord or upon motion” are inserted to give the court authority sua sponte to dismiss a misjoined party as well as upon motion. The third sentence, as far as the semicolon, is based substantially upon §58, c. 125, Code 1923, relating to nonjoinder of parties, with the following changes: (a) The words “full justice can not be done and” are taken from §6139, Code Va. 1919, and are added for emphasis; (b) The words “and such nonjoinder shall be made to appear by affidavit or otherwise” are taken from §6102, Code Va. 1919, being the same words used above in relation to misjoinder; (c) The words “at any time before final judgment or decree” are added in order to conform to the decision in Fulton v. Messenger, 61 W. Va. 477; (d) The words “of its own accord or upon motion” are the same words used above in relation to misjoinder; (e) The words “such omitted parties” are inserted instead of “them” in §58, c. 125, Code 1923; (f) the words “as plaintiffs or defendants” are added for emphasis; (g) The words “proper” and “process” explain themselves; (h) The words “at any stage of the cause, as the ends of justice may require” are taken from §6102, Code Va. 1919; (i) The words “and upon such terms as may appear to the court to be just” are added to provide for such orders of continuance or otherwise as may be necessary; (j) The last four lines of the third sentence, following the semicolon, are added in order to require a party, who makes a motion to join an omitted party, to state with convenient certainty the place of residence of such omitted party, and, if not known, to state such fact, so that the proper steps by process or order of publication may be taken to make him a party. Section 6102, Code Va. 1919, and §§17 and 19, c. 125, Code 1923, provide only for joinder of an omitted party who is a resident of the State. No reason occurs to prevent the joinder of a nonresident by order of publication in proceedings in rem or quasi in rem, especially those affecting the title to real estate, or to join a nonresident in an action at law where it is possible to attach his property in this State, provided some form of judgment can be devised to bind resident defendants personally and the attached property of nonresident defendants. It has been held in Virginia, under the misjoinder statute in force before the revision of 1919, that misjoinder is not a ground of demurrer, and it is Judge Burks’ opinion that the 1919 revision does not affect that holding. See note, Burks’ Pleading & Practice (2d ed.), page 63, also page 339. As the revised section is similar to the Virginia statute, it is probable that a similar holding will follow in this State, thus changing our present decisions as to misjoinder and possibly as to nonjoinder. Observe that the provisions of §18, c. 125, Code 1923, and of §6102, Code Va. 1919, requiring determination of a preliminary issue as to whether an action can be maintained against the persons whose nonjoinder is suggested, because of the Statute of Frauds or the Statute of Limitations, are not contained in the revised section. They have been omitted for the reason that the defenses mentioned are personal defenses which may be waived and not raised by the omitted parties when they are finally joined. If they had been named among the original parties defendant, no preliminary issue raising these defenses would have been necessary or proper until introduced by proper pleading, and no reason occurs for following a different course where those omitted are joined as parties by subsequent amendment. For a general discussion of nonjoinder and misjoinder of parties, together with statutes of various states relating thereto, see 28 W. Va. Law Quarterly, 197, 266, 285-6.
§35. Verdict and Judgment as to Particular Defendants; Costs.—If, in an action at law, to which one or more parties defendant have been added under the provisions of the preceding section, it shall appear by the subsequent pleadings, or at the trial thereof, that any of the defendants are liable, but that one or more of the persons so added are not liable, the plaintiff shall be entitled to judgment, or to verdict and judgment, as the case may be, against the defendants who are liable, and such as are not liable shall have judgment and recover costs as against the plaintiff, who shall be allowed that part of the costs pertaining to added defendants not liable, as costs against the defendants who caused them to be made parties.(Code 1849, c. 171, §22; Code 1860, c. 171, §22; Code 1868, c. 125, §19; 1882, c. 71, §19; Code 1923, c. 125, §19.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 19, c. 125, Code 1923, is amended to conform to the preceding section, which relates to both actions at law and suits in equity, while this section is limited to actions at law. The following material changes are made: (a) The words “that any of the defendants are liable” are used instead of the words “that all of the original defendants are liable,” in order to conform, to the preceding section which allows misjoined parties to be dismissed at any stage of the cause, to §32, art. 6 of this chapter, which allows judgment to be taken against part or all of the defendants in actions on contracts, and to similar common law principles in regard to tort actions; (b) The words “that part of the costs pertaining to added defendants not liable,” near the end of the section, are used in lieu of the words “the same,” in order to clarify the meaning and to allow the plaintiff to recover over against the defendants who caused the omitted persons to be made parties only that part of the costs pertaining to such of the added defendants as were found not liable; (c) The words “caused them to be made parties,” at the end of the section, are taken from §6106, Code Va. 1919.
§36. Scope of Demurrer; Objections to Filing of Pleadings for Insufficiency Abolished; Form of Demurrer; Grounds; Argument.—The sufficiency of any pleading, in law or equity, may be tested by a demurrer. Objections to the filing of any pleading, because of insufficiency, are abolished. The form of a demurrer shall be: The defendant (or plaintiff) says that the declaration (or other pleading) is not sufficient in law, for the following reason (or reasons): All demurrers in civil cases shall be in writing and shall state specifically the grounds of demurrer relied on, and no grounds shall be considered other than those so stated, except by the court of its own accord, but the demurrant may, by leave of the court, amend his demurrer by stating additional grounds, or otherwise, at any time before the trial at law or final hearing in equity. When a party demurs to any pleading, the demurrer shall at once be set for argument.(Code 1849, c. 171, §§30, 35; Code 1860, c. 171, §§30, 35; Code 1868, c. 125, §§28, 54; 1882, c. 71, §§28, 54; Code 1923, c. 125, §§28, 54.)
Revisers’ Note.—The first sentence is new. Its purpose is to afford an opportunity to test the sufficiency of any pleading, including answers and pleas in equity, by demurrer, thereby obviating the necessity for exceptions to answers. It establishes the demurrer as the testing pleading. The chief change accomplished by this sentence, read in conjunction with §65 of this article, is the authority given to demur to an answer in equity. Section 65 also abolishes exceptions to answers for insufficiency. It is not, however, the purpose to interfere with or affect in any way the present practice of moving to strike from an answer scandalous, impertinent or other matter which a demurrer may not reach. Such is now the practice in regard to bills in equity, the sufficiency of which is challenged by a demurrer. The revised section places answers upon the same plane. Under its provisions, the procedure for testing the sufficiency of an answer will be to permit it to be filed and then demur, and if the answer contains any extraneous matter which can not be reached upon demurrer, there may be a motion to strike such matter. The reasons prompting the proposed extension of the scope of demurrers are based largely upon their long use by lawyers for the purpose of testing the sufficiency of pleadings other than answers. Our appellate court repeatedly has held that exceptions to an answer are analogous to a demurrer. Croft Land Co. v. Royal Block Coal Co., 87 W. Va. 570; Caswell v. Caswell, 84 W. Va. 575; Lawrence v. Montgomery Gas Co., 84 W. Va. 382; County v. Cottle, 82 W. Va. 743. Moreover, the court has held that a motion to quash a notice of motion for judgment is in effect a demurrer thereto. Jennings v. Wiles, 82 W. Va. 573. A motion for award of a peremptory writ of mandamus, unaccompanied by a replication to the return to the alternative writ, is equivalent to a demurrer to the return. State ex rel. Aultman v. Ice, 75 W. Va. 476. Where the only defense interposed by defendants to a petition to condemn land consists of motions to quash and dismiss the same, and to quash the several orders made thereon, such motions are treated as demurrers confessing the truth of the matters alleged. County Court v. Thornburg, 65 W. Va. 185. A motion to strike out a plea has the same effect upon the legal sufficiency thereof that a demurrer thereto would have had. State v. Citizens Trust & Guaranty Company, 84 W. Va. 729. Since, as these authorities hold, exceptions to an answer, motions to quash, motions to strike out, and motions for the award of a peremptory writ of mandamus, are deemed and treated as demurrers, it is deemed proper expressly to authorize a demurrer to any pleading, by direction rather than by indirection, where the pleader wishes to test the legal sufficiency of the pleading. The second sentence is new. Its purpose is to terminate the present practice of testing the sufficiency of pleadings, such as pleas and answers, before they are filed, by objections to the filing thereof. The result will be to require a party to await the filing of such pleadings before testing their sufficiency. Under the revised section no advantage in time is lost by this course, for the party may demur immediately after the pleading is filed, and his demurrer must at once be set for argument. On the other hand, greater simplicity and uniformity are gained by the elimination of alternative remedies. As a result of the insertion of this provision, §56, c. 125, Code 1923, relating to objections to pleas before filing, is omitted. The third sentence embraces §28, c. 125, Code 1923, with the following changes: (a) The words “other pleading” are inserted instead of “plea, etc.,” following in this respect §6115, Code Va. 1919; (b) The words “or joinder in demurrer” after “demurrer” and the words “(or is)” after “not” are omitted, since §44 of this article dispenses with the necessity for joinder in demurrer; (c) The words “for the following reason (or reasons)” are added to introduce the grounds of demurrer assigned. The fourth sentence is new and is taken in part from the Virginia section referred to, with these differences: (a) Section 6115 requires the grounds of demurrer to be stated only on motion of a party, or on the court’s own motion, while the revised section requires their statement in all civil cases; (b) The words “except by the court of its own accord” are not in §6115, but are added in order to empower the court of its own accord at any time to consider questions pertaining to the legal sufficiency of a pleading, even when not assigned as grounds of demurrer; (c) The words “by leave of the court” are not in §6115, and are added in order to give the court authority to refuse amendments tendered just prior to the trial solely for purpose of delay; (d) The words “at law or final hearing in equity,” at the end of the third sentence, are new, being added to embrace both legal and equitable causes. In requiring assignment of grounds of demurrer, there is no intention of reviving special demurrers for defects of form, for in Pyles v. Carney, 85 W. Va. 159, the court holds that a demurrer is none the less general because it assigns a number of distinct grounds. The fifth sentence is substantially new, although taken in part from §54, c. 125, Code 1923. The words “When a party demurs to any pleading, the demurrer” are inserted in lieu of the words “When a plaintiff in equity files exceptions to an answer, the exceptions.” The change is made because §65 of this article abolishes exceptions to answers, and because it is deemed proper to require all demurrers to be set promptly for argument.
§37. Defects Disregarded on Demurrer.—On a demurrer (unless it be to a plea in abatement), the court shall not regard any defect or imperfection in the declaration or other pleading, whether it has heretofore been deemed mispleading or insufficient pleading or not, unless there be omitted something so essential to the action or defense that judgment, according to law and the very right of the cause, cannot be given. No demurrer shall be sustained because of the omission in any pleading of the words, “this he is ready to verify,” or “this he is ready to verify by the record,” or “as appears by the record”; but the opposite party may be excused from replying, demurring or otherwise answering to any pleading, which ought to have, but has not, such words therein, until they be inserted.(Code 1849, c. 171, §31; Code 1860, c. 171, §31; Code 1868, c. 125, §29; 1882, c. 71, §29; Code 1923, c. 125, §29.)
Revisers’ Note.—The following changes are made: (a) The words “other pleading” are used instead of “pleadings,” following in this respect §6118, Code Va. 1919; (b) The last sentence of §29, c. 125, Code 1923, is omitted because the preceding section, requiring every demurrer to state the grounds of demurrer, fully covers its provisions.
§38. Pleading in Abatement and in Bar at Same Time; Trial of Issues.—The defendant may plead in abatement and in bar at the same time, but the issue on the plea in abatement shall be first tried, and if such issue be found against the defendant, he may, nevertheless, make any other defense he may have to the action.(Code 1868, c. 125, §21; 1882, c. 71, §21; Code 1923, c. 125, §21.)
§39. Pleading Several Defenses; Demurrer and Special Replications to Special Plea.—The defendant in any action or suit may plead as many several matters, whether of law or fact, as he shall think necessary, except that if he plead the plea of non est factum he shall not, without leave of the court, be permitted to plead any other plea inconsistent therewith. To any special plea pleaded by a defendant, the plaintiff may demur and in addition plead as many special replications as he may deem necessary.(Code 1849, c. 171, §23; Code 1863, c. 171, §23; Code 1868, c. 125, §20; 1882, c. 71, §20; Code 1923, c. 125, §20.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “demurrer and in addition” are inserted to give to the plaintiff the same right to demur and reply that the statute now accords to a defendant. This amendment cures the defect revealed in Camden Clay Co. v. Town of New Martinsville, 67 W. Va. 525.
§40. Commencement of Plea.—No formal defense shall be required in a plea. It may commence as follows: “The defendant says that.”(Code 1849, c. 171, §28; Code 1860, c. 171, §28; Code 1868, c. 125, §26; 1882, c. 71, §26; Code 1923, c. 125, §26.)
§41. Unnecessary Allegations in Pleas, Etc.—In a plea, replication or subsequent pleading, intended to be pleaded in bar or in maintenance of the action, it shall not be necessary to use any allegation of “actionem non” or “precludi non,” or to the like effect, or any prayer of judgment.(Code 1849, c. 171, §24; Code 1860, c. 171, §24; Code 1868, c. 125, §22; 1882, c. 71, §22; Code 1923, c. 125, §22.)
Revisers’ Note.—“The” is omitted before “maintenance,” following in this respect §6109, Code Va. 1919, and our Code of 1868.
§42. Omission of Protestation.—No party shall be prejudiced by omitting a protestation in any pleading.(Code 1849, c. 171, §25; Code 1860, c. 171, §25; Code 1868, c. 125, §23; 1882, c. 71, §23; Code 1923, c. 125, §23.)
§43. Conclusion of Traverse.—All special traverses or traverses with an inducement of affirmative matter shall conclude to the country. But this regulation shall not preclude the opposite party from pleading over to the inducement when the traverse is immaterial.(Code 1849, c. 171, §26; Code 1860, c. 171, §26; Code 1868, c. 125, §24; 1882, c. 71, §24; Code 1923, c. 125, §24.)
§44. When Parties May Proceed Without Similiter or Joinder in Demurrer.—When any party takes issue on another party’s pleading, or traverses the same, or demurs, so that such other party is not let in to allege any new matter, no similiter or joinder in demurrer shall be necessary, but either party may proceed as if there were a similiter or joinder in demurrer.(Code 1849, c. 171, §27; Code 1860, c. 171, §27; Code 1868, c. 125, §25; 1882, c. 71, §25; Code 1923, c. 125, §25.)
Revisers’ Note.—As no substantial reason is perceived why either party should be required to add a similiter or join in a demurrer, the above section abolishes the necessity for a similiter or joinder in demurrer in every case.
§45. Unnecessary Allegations in Second or Other Plea.—It shall not be necessary to state in a second or other plea that it is pleaded by leave of the court, or according to the form of the statute, or to that effect.(Code 1849, c. 171, §29; Code 1860, c. 171, §29; Code 1868, c. 125, §27; 1882, c. 71, §27; Code 1923, c. 125, §27.)
§46. Pleading Denying Execution of Writing, or Entry or Genuineness of Judgment or Decree.—Where a declaration or other pleading alleges that any person made, indorsed, assigned or accepted any writing, it shall not be necessary to prove such fact unless the pleading which puts the matter in issue be verified, or there be an affidavit filed therewith denying such fact.
In any action, suit or proceeding upon, or to enforce, or in which is set off, a judgment or decree, foreign or domestic, wherein the recovery of such judgment or decree is alleged in any pleading, it shall not be necessary to prove the entry or genuineness of such judgment or decree, unless the pleading which puts the matter in issue be verified, or there be an affidavit filed therewith denying such entry or genuineness.(Code 1849, c. 171, §38; Code 1860, c. 171, §38; Code 1868, c. 125, §40; 1882, c. 71, §40; Code 1923, c. 125, §40.)
Revisers’ Note.—The first paragraph of this section is a redraft of §40, c. 125, Code 1923. Said §40 dispensed with proof only of the “handwriting of such person,” but the revised section dispenses with proof of the making, indorsement, assignment or acceptance of the instrument. This amendment probably changes the holding in Horner v. Amick, 64 W. Va. 172. The second paragraph of the section is new.
§47. Plea Denying Partnership; Form of Denial of Corporate Existence.—Where plaintiffs or defendants sue or are sued as partners, and their names are set forth in the declaration or bill, or where a plaintiff or defendant sues or is sued as a corporation, it shall not be necessary to prove the fact of such partnership or the existence of such corporation, unless the pleading which puts the matter in issue be verified, or there be an affidavit filed therewith denying such partnership or the existence of such corporation. A plea putting in issue the existence of a corporation shall be sufficient if it be in form or effect as follows:
“And the said defendant for plea says that the plaintiff (or defendant, as the case may be) is not a corporation, as in the plaintiff’s declaration is alleged.”(Code 1849, c. 171, §39; Code 1860, c. 171, §39; Code 1868, c. 125, §41; 1882, c. 71, §41; Code 1923, c. 125, §41.)
§48. Judgment or Decree by Confession.—In any action or suit instituted by process a defendant may, in the vacation of the court, and whether the action or suit be on the court docket or not, confess a judgment or decree in the clerk’s office for so much principal and interest as the plaintiff may be willing to accept a judgment or decree for. The same shall be entered of record by the clerk in the order book, and be as final and as valid as if entered in court on the day of such confession, except merely that the court shall have such control over it as is given by section seventy of this article.(Code 1849, c. 171, §41; Code 1860, c. 171, §41; Code 1868, c. 125, §43; 1882, c. 71, §43; Code 1923, c. 125, §43.)
Revisers’ Note.—The following changes are made: (a) The words “action or” before “suit” are new, the reason therefor being obvious; (b) The words “instituted by process” are inserted in order to require issuance of process as a prerequisite to confession of judgment in vacation. In Farquhar & Co. v. Dehaven, 70 W. Va. 738, 746, the court intimated that our present statute might authorize a defendant to appear in person in the clerk’s office, without process, and confess judgment. It is deemed better, however, to require as a prerequisite the issuance and service or acceptance of process, in order that there may be some other record in the clerk’s office than the mere judgment order. This section does not affect the right of a defendant to confess judgment in term without process; (c) The words “whether the action or suit be on the court docket or not” are taken in substance from §6130, Code Va. 1919, and are inserted in order to make plain that the confession may be made whether the cause is pending at rules or upon the court docket.
§49. Failure to Plead, Answer or Demur; Rule to Plead; Conditional Judgment or Decree Nisi; Judgment or Decree by Default; Order for Inquiry of Damages.—If a defendant, who appears, fail to plead, answer or demur to the declaration or bill, a rule may be given him to plead. If he fail to appear at the rule day at which the process against him is returned executed, or when it is returnable to a term, at the first rule day after it is so returned, the plaintiff, if he has filed his declaration or bill, may have a conditional judgment or decree nisi as to such defendant. No service of such decree nisi or conditional judgment shall be necessary. But at the next rule day after the same is entered, if the defendant continue in default, or at the expiration of any rule upon him with which he fails to comply, if the case be in equity, the bill shall be entered as taken for confessed as to him, and if it be at law, judgment shall be entered against him, with an order for the damages to be inquired into, when such inquiry is proper.(Code 1849, c. 171, §42; Code 1860, c. 171, §42; Code 1868, c. 125, §44; 1882, c. 71, §44; Code 1923, c. 125, §44.)
§50. When Inquiry of Damages Unnecessary.—There need be no such inquiry in any action upon a bond or other writing for the payment of money, which by its terms ascertains the amount to be paid thereunder, or against the drawer or indorsers of a bill of exchange or negotiable note, or in an action or scire facias upon a judgment or recognizance.(Code 1849, c. 171, §43; Code 1860, c. 171, §43; Code 1868, c. 125, §45; 1882, c. 71, §45; Code 1923, c. 125, §45.)
Revisers’ Note.—The following changes are made: (a) The revised section omits the words “for debt” after the first word “action,” following in this respect §6132, Code Va. 1919. Prior to Acts 1882, these words read “of debt” and the change to “for debt” may have been a typographical error; (b) The words “which by its terms ascertains the amount to be paid thereunder” merely express the limitation judically expressed in Rosenthal v. Fox, 70 W. Va. 752, and similar cases; (c) The revised section omits the words “of debt” after the second word “action,” following in this respect said §6132.
§51. Office Judgment; Affidavits by Plaintiff and Defendant; Judgment.—Every judgment entered in the clerk’s office in a case wherein there is no order for an inquiry of damages, and every nonsuit or dismission entered therein, shall, if not previously set aside, become a final judgment on the last day of the next succeeding term of the court wherein the action is pending. If the action in which such judgment is entered be one for the recovery of money arising out of contract, and the plaintiff has filed with his declaration (which in all such cases he may do) an affidavit of himself or some other credible person stating that there is, as affiant verily believes, due and unpaid from the defendant to the plaintiff upon the demand or demands stated in the declaration, including principal and interest, after deducting all payments, credits and sets-off made by the defendant, or to which he is entitled, a sum certain to be named in the affidavit, no plea shall be filed in the case either at rules or in court, unless the defendant shall file with the plea an affidavit of himself or some other credible person that there is not, as affiant verily believes, any sum due from the defendant to the plaintiff upon the demand or demands stated in the plaintiff’s declaration; or stating a sum certain, less than that stated in the affidavit filed by the plaintiff, which affiant verily believes is all that is due from the defendant to the plaintiff upon the demand or demands stated in the plaintiff’s declaration. If such plea and affidavit be not filed, judgment shall be entered for the plaintiff by the court for the sum stated in his affidavit, with interest thereon from the date of the affidavit until paid. If such plea and affidavit be filed by the defendant and it be admitted in such affidavit that any such sum is due from the defendant to the plaintiff, judgment may be taken by the plaintiff for the sum so admitted to be due, with interest thereon from the date of the affidavit filed by the plaintiff until paid, and the case tried as to the residue. If the plaintiff has not filed such affidavit with his declaration, and the office judgment in the case be not set aside, the judgment shall not be entered by the court until the plaintiff files such affidavit or proves his case in open court, and the judgment in either case shall be entered as heretofore provided for. If the case be one arising out of contract in which there is an order for an inquiry of damages, and the plaintiff has filed with his declaration the affidavit hereinbefore mentioned, no plea shall be filed in the case, either at rules or in court, unless the defendant shall file therewith the affidavit hereinbefore required to set aside an office judgment in which no order for an inquiry of damages had been made. When a jury is impaneled to execute an order for an inquiry of damages, their oath shall be that they will well and truly find the amount, if any, which the plaintiff is entitled to recover in the action, and a true verdict render according to the evidence. And the affidavit of the plaintiff hereinbefore mentioned shall be legal evidence on such inquiry.(Code 1849, c. 171, §44; Code 1860, c. 171, §44; Code 1868, c. 125, §46; 1882, c. 71, §46; Code 1923, c. 125, §46.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 46, c. 125, Code 1923, is modified to permit an affidavit for either a plaintiff or defendant to be made by any credible person. A person other than the plaintiff or defendant may be better qualified to make the affidavit because of more accurate information. A corporation plaintiff or defendant must necessarily rely on the affidavit of an individual.
§52. Setting Aside Such Judgment; Trial.—If a defendant against whom a judgment is entered in the office, whether an order for an inquiry of damages has been made therein or not, shall, before the end of the term at which it becomes final, appear and plead to issue, and shall, in the cases mentioned in the next preceding section in which an affidavit is required, file such affidavit with his plea, the judgment shall be set aside; but if the judgment has been entered up in court or the order for an inquiry of damages has been executed, it shall not be set aside without good cause be shown therefor. Any such issue may be tried at the same term, unless the defendant show by affidavit, filed with the papers, good cause for a continuance. But the plaintiff shall have the right to cross-examine the defendant upon the matters contained in such affidavit.(Code 1849, c. 171, §45; Code 1860, c. 171, §45; Code 1868, c. 125, §47; 1882, c. 71, §47; Code 1923, c. 125, §47.)
§53. Hearing as to Defendants Served; Discontinuance.—Where, in any action against two or more defendants, the process is served on part of them, the plaintiff may proceed to judgment as to any so served, and either discontinue it as to the others or from time to time, as the process is served as to such others, proceed to judgment as to them until judgment be obtained against all. Such discontinuance of the action as to any defendant not served with process shall not operate as a bar of any subsequent action which may be brought against him for the same cause.(Code 1849, c. 171, §49; Code 1860, c. 171, §49; Code 1868, c. 125, §52; 1882, c. 71, §52; 1919, c. 84, §52; Code 1923, c. 125, §52.)
§54. Form of Bill of Complaint.—The plaintiff’s bill may be in form or in substance as follows:
A.... B...., Plaintiff.
Every person designated in the caption of such bill as a defendant shall be a defendant therein, without a prayer that he be made such, and shall be required to answer the bill in the same manner and to the same extent as if he were therein called upon to do so.(Code 1868, c. 125, §37; 1882, c. 71, §37; Code 1923, c. 125, §37.)
§55. Jury Trial of Issue Upon Plea in Equity.—A plaintiff in equity may take issue upon a plea, and either party may have such issue tried by a jury.(Code 1849, c. 171, §33; Code 1860, c. 171, §33; Code 1868, c. 125, §31; 1882, c. 71, §31; Code 1923, c. 125, §31.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “either party may” are new, being taken from §6121, Code Va. 1919.
§56. Argument of Plea or Demurrer in Equity; Time to Answer After Demurrer Overruled; Proceeding on Default; Status of Answer Filed in Vacation.—A plaintiff in equity may have any plea or demurrer set down to be argued. If the same be overruled, no other plea or demurrer shall afterwards be received, but the defendant shall file his answer, in court, if in session, or, if not in session, in the clerk’s office of the court in which the suit is pending, within fifteen days after the overruling of his plea or demurrer, unless, for good cause shown, the time is enlarged by the court, or the judge thereof in vacation; and if he fail to appear and answer the bill within such fifteen days, or additional time, if any such be granted, the plaintiff shall be entitled to a decree against him for the relief prayed for therein, or the plaintiff may proceed against such defendant in the manner prescribed by section sixty-six of this article. Any answer filed in the clerk’s office in vacation pursuant to the provisions of this section shall have the same status and effect as if filed in term.(Code 1849, c. 171, §32; Code 1860, c. 171, §32; Code 1868, c. 125, §30; 1882, c. 71, §30; Code 1923, c. 125, §30.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section omits provision for the rule to answer and prescribes in lieu thereof a definite time within which the defendant must answer after plea or demurrer overruled. This imposes upon a defendant the duty to answer within the time specified in the statute, or suffer the burdens imposed by it as a result of his default. It also changes the rule of decision, construing §§30 and 53, c. 125, Code 1923, that a defendant who has failed to answer within the time prescribed by a rule against him by the court, upon overruling his demurrer to plaintiff’s bill, may nevertheless file his answer at any time thereafter before final decree is entered. See the following decisions and others of similar nature: Waggy v. Waggy, 77 W. Va. 144; Bartrug v. Edgell, 80 W. Va. 220; Snider v. Robinson, 85 W. Va. 673. The second change, allowing the alternative procedure prescribed by §66 of this article upon failure of the defendant to answer, is taken from §6120, Code Va. 1919. The last sentence of the section is new. It is added in order to make clear the status and effect of answers filed in the clerk’s office in vacation pursuant to the provisions of this section, whether filed at rules or not.
§57. Time to Answer, in General.—A defendant may file his answer at any time before final decree, unless required to file it sooner under section fifty-six of this article, or by a proper rule of court under section four, article one, chapter fifty-one of this Code; but a cause shall not be sent to rules or continued, because an answer is filed in it, unless good cause therefor be shown by affidavit filed with the papers.(Code 1849, c. 171, §34; Code 1860, c. 171, §34; Code 1868, c. 125, §53; 1882, c. 71, §53; Code 1923, c. 125, §53.)
Revisers’ Note,—This section follows closely §53, c. 125, Code 1923, with the material change indicated by the words, “unless required to file it sooner under section 56 of this article, or by a proper rule of court under section four, article one, chapter fifty-one of this Code.” This change will permit a defendant to delay filing his answer until immediately before final decree only in cases where he has not filed a plea or has not demurred to the plaintiff’s bill. If the defendant has filed a plea or has demurred, and his plea or demurrer has been overruled, he must file his answer within the time allowed by §56.
§58. Claim in Answer for Affirmative Relie Special Reply.—A defendant in a suit in equity may, in his answer, allege any new matter constituting a claim for affirmative relief in such suit against the plaintiff or any defendant therein, in the same manner and with like effect as if the same had been alleged in a cross-bill filed by him therein; and in such case, if the plaintiff or defendant against whom such relief is claimed desire to controvert the relief prayed for in the answer, he shall file a special reply in writing, denying such allegations of such answer as he does not admit to be true, and stating any facts constituting a defense thereto. But in case a defendant allege new matter in his answer upon which he relies for and prays affirmative relief, such defendant shall not file a cross-bill in the same cause except upon condition of striking from his answer all such matter and prayer for affirmative relief as are contained in such cross-bill.(Code 1868, c. 125, §35; 1882, c. 71, §35; Code 1923, c. 125, §35.)
§59. Answer Asking Affirmative Relief Equivalent to Cross-Bill.—When a defendant in equity in his answer alleges new matter constituting a claim to affirmative relief, the case shall be decided upon the same principles, and the same relief shall be decreed in the case, as if a cross-bill had been filed to obtain such relief.(Code 1868, c. 125, §57; 1882, c. 71, §57; Code 1923, c. 125, §57.)
§60. Admissions in Equity by Failure to Deny.—Every material allegation of the bill not controverted by an answer, and every material allegation of new matter in the answer constituting a claim for affirmative relief not controverted by a special reply in writing, shall, for the purposes of the suit, be taken as true, and no proof thereof shall be required.(Code 1868, c. 125, §36; 1882, c. 71, §36; Code 1923, c. 125, §36.)
§61. Proof of Allegations Denied by Answer.—When a defendant in equity shall, in his answer, deny any material allegation of the bill, the effect of such denial shall only be to put the plaintiff on satisfactory proof of the truth of such allegation, and any evidence which satisfies the court or jury of the truth thereof shall be sufficient to establish the same.(Code 1868, c. 125, §59; 1882, c. 71, §59; Code 1923, c. 125, §59.)
§62. Verification of Pleadings in Equity.—If the plaintiff desire the defendant to answer the bill on oath, he must verify his bill by affidavit, and if the bill be so verified, the defendant must in like manner verify his answer. But if the bill be not verified, the defendant need not verify his answer, and if he does so it shall not be entitled to any more weight in the cause than if it had not been verified. In case the defendant verify his answer, alleging new matter constituting a claim for affirmative relief, the plaintiff must verify his special reply thereto. A general replication to an answer claiming affirmative relief shall not apply to so much of such answer as states facts constituting a claim to such relief.(Code 1868, c. 125, §38; 1882, c. 71, §38; Code 1923, c. 125, §38.)
§63. Appearance of Corporation by Attorney; Verification of Pleading.—Any corporation may appear, plead or answer by attorney in any action, suit or proceeding for the same purposes, in the same manner and form and to the same extent and effect as if it were a natural person. Any answer or pleading of a corporation shall be verified in any case in which it would be required to be verified if it were the answer or pleading of a natural person.
Revisers’ Note.—This section is new. The first provision is intended primarily to abolish the rule adhered to in Teter v. W. Va. C. & P. Railroad Co., 35 W. Va. 433, and Cunningham v. Birch River Lumber Co., 89 W. Va. 326, to the effect that an answer in equity filed by a corporation shall be signed by the president and have the corporate seal attached. The object is to permit the answer to be signed by the attorney on behalf of the corporation and dispense with the corporate seal. There has never been any substantial reason for the rule and even its artificial justification has ceased to exist. Under the equity practice independently of statute, it is a universal rule that all answers shall be verified by the defendant personally. Since a corporation defendant is incapable of a personal verification, the signature of the president and the corporate seal are required as substitutes for such verification. The statute, however (the preceding section of this article) has long dispensed with the general requirement that answers shall be verified. Hence the change in practice to be effected by this section is cognate to the change already effected by the preceding section. This section is also intended to abolish any obstacle that exists under the common law to a corporation’s appearing by attorney in a common law action or proceeding, as in Quarrier v. Peabody Insurance Co., 10 W. Va. 507, to the extent that the latter case has not been overruled in Woodell v. W. Va. Improvement Co., 38 W. Va. 23, and other cases subsequent to the Quarrier case. See §32 of this article providing generally that pleas in abatement, which include pleas to the jurisdiction, may be pleaded by attorney. Since, under the provisions of the following section as amended in this revision, a pleading may be verified by any credible person, no reason is perceived why a corporation should not be required to verify its pleadings in any case where a natural person would be required to do so. Hence the second provision is added to this section.
§64. Form of Verification of Pleading.—The verification of any pleading may be by the pleader or some other credible person. The verification, when by the plaintiff or defendant, may be in form or effect as follows:
A........ B........,
Plaintiff or defendant.
Taken, sworn to and subscribed before me this ...... day of ......
C........ D........,
Clerk (or other officer swearing him.)
If the party required to verify a pleading be an administrator or other fiduciary, it shall be sufficient if he swear that he believes the plea or other pleading to be true. A bill of injunction to be sworn to by any person other than the plaintiff, or answer to a bill of injunction to be sworn to by a person other than the defendant making the answer, must be so drawn as to show which of the allegations therein contained are made on information and belief.
The verification, when by a person other than the plaintiff or defendant, shall be in form or effect as follows:
A........ B........
(Code 1849, c. 171, §40; Code 1860, c. 171, §40; Code 1868, c. 125, §42; 1882, c. 71, 42; Code 1923, c. 125, §42.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 42, c. 125, Code 1923, is modified to permit any pleading to be verified either by the pleader or by some other credible person. A person other than the plaintiff or defendant may be better qualified to verify the pleading because of more accurate information. A corporation plaintiff or defendant must necessarily rely on verification by an individual. The second form of verification is modified to apply to all cases of verification by a person other than the plaintiff or defendant. Originally it applied only to injunction suits.
§65. Exceptions to Answers for Insufficiency Abolished; Demurrer; Amended Answer; Procedure if Insufficient.—Exceptions to answers for insufficiency are abolished. The test of sufficiency shall be made by a demurrer; if found insufficient, but amendable, the court may allow amendment on terms. If the amended or second answer is adjudged insufficient, the defendant may be examined upon interrogatories and committed until he answers them, or on motion of the plaintiff the court may strike out the answer and enter a decree for the plaintiff.(Code 1849, c. 171, §36; Code 1860, c. 171, §36; Code 1868, c. 125, §55; 1882, c. 71, §55; Code 1923, c. 125, §55.)
Revisers’ Note.—The first two complete sentences are new, being taken from §6123, Code Va. 1919, with one change only, to-wit, substitution of “demurrer” for “motion to strike out.” The third sentence is taken largely from §55, c. 125, Code 1923, with the following three changes: (a) The words “If the amended or second answer” are new; (b) The words “the defendant” are used instead of “he”; (c) The words “or on motion of the plaintiff the court may strike out the answer and enter a decree for the plaintiff” are taken in part from the Virginia section referred to, thereby giving to a plaintiff dealing with a recalcitrant defendant alternative rights similar to those contained in §56 of this article, relating to the failure of a defendant to answer after plea or demurrer overruled.
§66. Attachment or Order to Answer Interrogatories.—Although a bill be taken for confessed as to any defendant, the plaintiff may have an attachment against him, or an order for him to be brought in to answer interrogatories. No plea or demurrer shall be received after such attachment, unless by order of court, upon motion.(Code 1849, c. 171, §46; Code 1860, c. 171, §46; Code 1868, c. 125, §48; 1882, c. 71, §48; Code 1923, c. 125, §48.)
§67. Insufficient Answer After Rule.—If a defendant, after process of contempt, put in an answer which is adjudged insufficient, the plaintiff may proceed with the process of contempt, as if no answer had been filed, or, at the option of the plaintiff, if the bill be verified, the court may thereupon render such decree in the case as may be just.(Code 1849, c. 171, §47; Code 1860, c. 171, §47; Code 1868, c. 125, §49; 1882, c. 71, §49; Code 1923, c. 125, §49.)
Revisers’ Note.—The word “proceed” is used instead of “go on” in order to improve the diction. The word “subsequent” before the second word “process” is omitted.
§68. Setting Cause in Equity for Hearing.—Whenever a suit in equity is matured at rules as to all of the defendants, it shall be the ex officio duty of the clerk, as soon as the same is matured, to set the case for hearing as to them. If the suit be matured as to only a part of the defendants, the plaintiff may appear at rules and have it set for hearing as to such part. If one month elapse after the answer of a defendant is filed, without the case being so set and without a demurrer being filed to his answer, such defendant may appear at rules and have the case set for hearing as to himself.(Code 1849, c. 171, §48; Code 1860, c. 171, §48; Code 1868, c. 125, §50; 1882, c. 71, §50; Code 1923, c. 125, §50.)
Revisers’ Note.—The first two sentences of the section are new, being taken from §6138, Code Va. 1919, with the following changes: (a) At the close of the first sentence the words “and place it on the court docket” are omitted, since that duty is already imposed by law upon the clerk. See §2, c. 131, Code 1923; (b) In the second sentence the words “appear at rules and” are added in order to define the procedure. The word “matured” in the two sentences referred to sufficiently expresses the thought contained in a portion of §50, c. 125, Code 1923, here omitted, that a cause may be matured for hearing either upon bill taken for confessed or upon answer filed at rules. The last sentence of the section is the closing sentence of §50, c. 125, Code 1923, with the following changes: (a) “One” is used instead of “two” before “month” in order to give a defendant more chance to speed the cause, following in this respect the Virginia section referred to; (b) The words “a demurrer” are used instead of “exceptions” in order to conform to §65 of this article abolishing exceptions and substituting a demurrer; (c) The words “such defendant” are used instead of “he” for purposes of clarity; (d) The words “appear at rules and” are added for reasons heretofore given.
§69. Hearing as to One Defendant; Rule Mature Cause.—If a suit in equity be set for hearing as to any defendant, it shall be heard as to him, unless his interests be so connected with those of other defendants in the suit that it would be improper to decide upon their interests separately. And though there be such connection, a defendant as to whom the case has been set for hearing may have an order upon the plaintiff to use due diligence to mature the cause for hearing as to the other defendants, and, unless it be so matured within such time as the court may deem reasonable, shall be entitled to a hearing or dismission of it as to him.(Code 1849, c. 171, §50; Code 1860, c. 171, §50; Code 1868, c. 125, §51; 1882, c. 71, §51; Code 1923, c. 125, §51.)
§70. Control by Court Over Proceedings in Office During Vacation.—The court shall have control over all proceedings in the office during any preceding vacation. It may reinstate any cause discontinued during such vacation, set aside any of the proceedings or correct any mistake therein, and make such order concerning the same as may be just.(Code 1849, c. 171, §51; Code 1860, c. 171, §51; Code 1868, c. 125, §60; 1882, c. 71, §60; Code 1923, c. 125, §60.)
Revisers’ Note.—The word “any” is inserted instead of “the” before “preceding,” in order to give the court control over proceedings in any preceding vacation. See Herring v. Bender, 48 W. Va. 498, 501.
Article 5. Payment and Set-off.
§1. Payment Before Action Brought May be Pleaded.—In any action for the recovery of a debt, the defendant may plead payment of the debt (or of so much as is due by the condition) before action brought.(Code 1849, c. 172, §1; Code 1860, c. 172, §1; Code 1868, c. 126, §1; Code 1923, c. 126, §1.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “for the recovery of a debt,” taken from §6141, Code Va. 1919, are substituted for the words “of debt.” The chief efficacy of this statute being to permit a plea of payment in an action on a sealed instrument, and not only debt, but also covenant under the modern common law, and assumpsit by virtue of the West Virginia statute, as well as motions for judgment, all being proper remedies in such cases, it is deemed advisable to expand the terms of the statute so as to apply to all remedies for the recovery of a debt.
§2. Payment Into Court After Action as Brought.—In any personal action, the defendant may pay into court, to the clerk, a sum of money on account of what is claimed, or by way of compensation or amends, and plead that he is not indebted to the plaintiff (or that the plaintiff has not sustained damages) to a greater amount than such sum.(Code 1849, c. 172, §2; Code 1860, c. 172, §2; Code 1868, c. 126, §2; Code 1923, c. 126, §2.)
§3. Acceptance of Such Payment; Trial of Issue as to Residue.—The plaintiff may accept such sum, either in full satisfaction and then have judgment for his costs, or in part satisfaction and reply to the plea generally and if issue thereon be found for the defendant judgment shall be given for the defendant and he shall recover his costs.(Code 1849, c. 172, §3; Code 1860, c. 172, §3; Code 1868, c. 126, §3; Code 1923, c. 126, §3.)
§4. Set-off; Plea or Account Thereof; Counter Set-off; Trial.—In a suit for any debt, the defendant may at the trial prove and have allowed against such debt any payment or set-off which is so described in his plea, or in an account filed therewith, as to give the plaintiff notice of its nature, but not otherwise. Although the claim of the plaintiff be jointly against several persons, and the set-off be of a debt, not to all, but only to a part of them, this section shall extend to such set-off, if it appear that the persons against whom such claim is, stand in the relation of principal and surety, and that the person entitled to the set-off is the principal. And when the defendant is allowed to file and prove an account of set-off to the plaintiff’s demand, the plaintiff shall be allowed to file and prove an account of counter set-off, and make such other defense as he might have made had an original action been brought upon such set-off, and, in the issue, the jury or judge shall ascertain the true state of indebtedness between the parties, and judgment shall be rendered accordingly.(Code 1849, c. 172, §4; Code 1860, c. 172, §4; 1868, c. 96, §4; Code 1868, c. 126, §4; Code 1923, c. 126, §4.)
Revisers’ Note.—Near the end of the section, the words “or justice” are omitted after “judge” and the word “or” is inserted after “jury,” as the subject of set-off in actions before justices is fully dealt with in the chapter on justices.
§5. Special Pleas in the Nature of Pleas of Set-off; Verification.—In any action on a contract, the defendant may file a plea alleging any such failure in the consideration of the contract, or fraud in its procurement, or any such breach of any warranty to him of the title to real property or of the title or the soundness of personal property, for the price or value whereof he entered into the contract, or any other matter, as would entitle him either to recover damages at law from the plaintiff, or the person under whom the plaintiff claims, or to relief in equity, in whole or in part, against the obligation of the contract; or, if the contract be by deed, alleging any such matter existing before its execution, or any such mistake therein, or in the execution thereof, or any such other matter, as would entitle him to such relief in equity; and in either case alleging the amount to which he is entitled by reason of the matters contained in the plea. Every such plea shall be verified by affidavit.(Code 1849, c. 172, §5; Code 1860, c. 172, §5; Code 1868, c. 126, §5; Code 1923, c. 126, §5.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “or any other matter,” after the word “contract” near the beginning of the section, and the words “or any such other matter” near the end of the section, adopted from §6145, Code Va. 1919, are new. Under §5, c. 126, Code 1923, a defendant was permitted to recover an excess over in three instances only: (a) failure of consideration; (b) fraud in the procurement of the contract, and (c) breach of warranty. The added words are intended to give him a right to recover an excess over, to which he is entitled, in any instance where he recoups damages under the provisions of this article, and the revised section as a whole contemplates the settlement of all differences that are connected with the subject matter of the plaintiff’s claim.
§6. When Such Plea Bar to Relief in Equity; Nature of Replication.—If a defendant entitled to such plea as is mentioned in the preceding section shall not tender it, or though he tender it, if it be rejected for not being offered in due time, he shall not be precluded from such relief in equity as he would have been entitled to if the preceding section had not been enacted. If an issue in fact is joined on such plea and the same be found against the defendant, he shall be barred of relief in equity upon the matters alleged in the plea, unless upon such ground as would entitle a party to relief against a judgment in other cases. Every such issue in fact shall be upon a general replication that the plea is not true; and the plaintiff may give in evidence, on such issue, any matter which could be given in evidence under a special replication, if such replication were allowed.(Code 1849, c. 172, §6; Code 1860, c. 172, §6; Code 1868, c. 126, §6; Code 1923, c. 126, §6.)
§7. Application of Article to Voluntary Bonds or Deeds.—Nothing in this article shall impair or affect the obligation of any bond or other deed deemed voluntary in law, upon any party thereto, or his representatives.(Code 1849, c. 172, §7; Code 1860, c. 172, §7; Code 1868, c. 126, §7; Code 1923, c. 126, §7.)
§8. Set-off As to Part of Demand; Continuance.—If the defendant file a plea or account of set-off which covers or applies to part of the plaintiff’s demand, judgment may forthwith be rendered for the part not controverted and the costs accrued until the filing of the plea or ac count, and the case shall be proceeded with for the residue as if the part for which judgment was rendered had not been included therein. And if, in addition to such plea or account, the defendant plead some other plea, going to the whole or residue of the demand, the case shall not be continued as to the part not controverted by plea or account of set-off, unless good cause be shown for such continuance. A failure to take such judgment, however, at the term the plea or account is filed, shall not effect a discontinuance of the cause.(Code 1849, c. 172, §8; Code 1860, c. 172, §8; Code 1868, c. 126, §8; Code 1923, c. 126, §8.)
Revisers’ Note.—In accord with §6148, Code Va. 1919, after “unless,” near the end of the section, the words “the additional plea be also verified by affidavit, or” are omitted. No reason is perceived why the mere verification of a plea under this section should give a right to a continuance. The last sentence is adopted from said §6148, in order to obviate a discontinuance of the cause un der the rule approved in Risher v. Wheeling Roof ing Co., 57 W. Va. 149, and Southall v. Exchange Bank, 12 Grat. 312.
§9. Status of Defendant With Reference to Set-off; Verdict and Judgment.—A defendant who files a plea or account under this article shall be deemed to have brought an action against the plaintiff (at the time of filing the same) for the matters mentioned in such plea or account, and the plaintiff shall not, after the plea or account is filed, dismiss his case without the defendant’s consent, but shall be entitled to every ground, of defense against the defendant’s demand of which he might have availed himself by special plea or otherwise in any action brought against him upon the same demand. On the trial of the issue in such case, the jury shall ascertain the amount to which the defendant is entitled and apply it as a set-off against the plaintiff’s demand, and, if such amount be more than the plaintiff is entitled to, shall ascertain the amount of the excess, including principal and interest. Judgment in such case shall be for the defendant against the plaintiff for such excess, with interest from the date of the judgment till payment.(Code 1849 c. 172, §9; Code 1860, c. 172, §9; Code 1868, c 126, §9; Code 1923, c. 126, §9.)
Article 6. Trial.
Revisers’ Note.—Section 8, c. 131, Code 1923, is placed in §§27, 28, art. 4 of this chapter.
§1. Law Docket.—Before every term of a circuit court, or any other court of record exercising jurisdiction in the trial or hearing of actions at law, the clerk shall make out a docket of the following cases pending, to wit: First, cases of the State; secondly, motions and actions, in the order in which the notices of the motions were filed, or in which the proceedings at rules in the actions were terminated, docketing together as new cases those not on the docket at the previous term. He shall, under control of the court, set the cases to certain days; and the docket shall be called and the cases on it tried or disposed of for the term in that order, except that the court may for good cause take up any case out of turn.(Code 1849, c. 177, §1; Code 1860, c. 177, §1; Code 1868, c. 131, §1; 1872-3, c. 93, §1; 1882, c. 120, §1; Code 1923, c. 131, §1.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words in the first sentence, “or any other court of record exercising jurisdiction in the trial or hearing of actions at law,” are added to make the section apply to intermediate courts and any other courts of record which have, or may be given, jurisdiction over the trial of common law actions.
§2. Chancery Docket.—Before every term of a circuit court, or any other court exercising jurisdiction in the hearing of suits in chancery, the clerk shall make out a separate docket of chancery cases in which there are motions, and of other chancery cases which have been set for hearing as to any party, or which the court is to hear upon a plea or demurrer; and during such term every cause on such docket shall be called and disposed of.(Code 1849, c. 177, §2; Code 1860, c. 177, §2; Code 1868, c. 131, §2; 1872-3, c. 93, §2; 1882, c. 120, §2; Code 1923, c. 131, §2.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words in the first sentence, “or any other court exercising jurisdiction in the hearing of suits in chancery,” are added to make the section apply to all courts hearing chancery causes. The word “or” before “demurrer” is new, and the words “or exceptions to an answer” are omitted, as exceptions to an answer are abolished by §65, art. 4 of this chapter.
§3. Application for Hearing.—Any party asking the court to hear a case may, if the court refuses to hear it, have his application spread upon the record, with a statement of the facts in relation thereto.(Code 1849, c. 177, §3; Code 1860, c. 177, §3; Code 1868, c. 131, §3; 1882, c. 120, §3; Code 1923, c. 131, §3.)
§4. Direction and Trial of Issues Out of Chancery.—Any court, wherein is pending a chancery case in which there is such a conflict in the evidence as, in the opinion of such court, to render it proper, may direct an issue thereon to be tried in such court. And the court shall have the discretion to direct such an issue to be tried before any proof has been taken by either the plaintiff or the defendant, if it shall be shown by affidavit or affidavits, after reasonable notice, that the case will be rendered doubtful by the conflicting evidence of the respective parties. Although the verdict on such issue may be set aside, there shall be no new trial thereof, but the court may proceed to decree as if no issue had been directed. No issue out of chancery shall be directed in any other case unless specially authorized by statute. Nothing in this section shall be construed to conflict with any of the provisions of chapter forty-one of this Code.(Code 1849, c. 177, §4; Code 1860, c. 177, §4; Code 1868, c. 131, §4; 1872-3, c. 93, §4; 1875, c. 79, §4; 1882, c. 120, §4; Code 1923, c. 131, §4.)
Revisers’ Note.—“Any” is substituted for “A circuit” at the beginning of the section, thus following Code Va. 1919, §6246. At the end of the first sentence, the words “or in any other circuit court” are omitted. No reason is perceived why the issue should not always be tried in the same court in which the suit is pending at the time when the issue is directed. The second sentence is new and is adopted verbatim from §6246, Code, Va. 1919, except that the concluding words “respective parties” are substituted for the words “opposing party” in the Virginia Code. The words “unless specially authorized by statute” are new and the effect and purpose thereof are obvious.
§5. Trial of Action at Law; Separate Verdicts on Different Issues; Interrogatories to the Jury.—Any court of record having jurisdiction of the trial of common law actions may, in any case before it other than a chancery case, have an issue tried, or an inquiry of damages made, by a jury, and determine all questions concerning the legality of evidence and other matters of law which may arise. Upon the trial of any issue or issues by a jury, whether under this section or not, the court may, on motion of any party, direct the jury, in addition to rendering a general verdict, to render separate verdicts upon any one or more of the issues, or to find in writing upon particular questions of fact to be stated in writing. The action of the court upon such motions shall be subject to review as in other cases. Where any such separate verdict or special findings shall be inconsistent with the general verdict, the former shall control the latter, and the court shall give judgment accordingly.(Code 1849, c. 177, §5; Code 1860, c. 177, §5; Code 1868, c. 131, §5; 1872-3, c. 93, §5; 1875, c. 79, §5; 1882, c. 120, §5; Code 1923, c. 131, §5.)
Revisers’ Note.—The phrase “Any court of record having jurisdiction of the trial of common law actions,” at the beginning of the section, is substituted for the words “A circuit court,” in order to make the section apply to any court of record in the trial of common law actions.
§6. Time for Trial.—At the next term after an order at the rules for an inquiry of damages, such order may be executed and a final judgment rendered thereupon, unless good cause be shown for a continuance.(Code 1849, c. 177, §6; Code 1860, c. 177, §6; Code 1868, c. 131, §6; 1882, c. 120, §6; Code 1923, c. 131, §6.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “such order,” taken from §6249, Code Va. 1919, are substituted for “the same,” to make the meaning more explicit. The word “executed,” taken from §6249, Code Va. 1919, is substituted for “tried,” in order to conform more accurately to the true nature of the hearing on a writ of inquiry. The word “thereupon,” taken from §6249, Code Va. 1919, is substituted for “therein,” for greater precision. The latter sentence of §6, c. 131, Code 1923, is made the substance of the following section.
§7. Continuance on Account of Absence of Witness.—If in any case a continuance be asked because of the absence of a witness, an affidavit must be filed, if required by any party opposing, setting forth, in addition to other matters required in order to obtain a continuance, the name of the witness and the testimony he is expected to give, and the affiant must, if required by any opposing party, submit to cross-examination in open court upon the matters set forth in such affidavit.(1882, c. 120, §6; Code 1923, c. 131, §6.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section, with the exception of the words “in any case,” at the beginning of the section, which are new, is a literal copy of the latter sentence of §6, c. 131, Code 1923. This sentence is placed in a new section to indicate that it applies to all cases, and not merely to cases where writs of inquiry are to be executed. The residue of said §6 is in the preceding section.
§8. Continuance of Causes at End of Term.—All causes on the docket of any court, and all other matters ready for its decision which shall not have been determined before the end of a term, whether regular, adjourned or special, shall, without any order of continuance, stand continued until the next term.(Code 1849, c. 161, §16; Code 1860, c. 161, §16; Code 1868, c. 114, §12; 1872-3, c. 9, §12; Code 1923, c. 114, §12.)
Revisers’ Note.—The provisions of §12, c. 114, Code 1923, are placed in this article on the assumption that they pertain essentially to trial procedure rather than to the subject of courts in general.
§9. Case Not to be Discontinued by Failure to Sign Judgment.—When a defendant has demurred to, filed a plea to, or otherwise put in issue, a part of the plaintiff’s claim and has left the residue of such claim unanswered, the case shall in no event be discontinued merely because the plaintiff has failed to sign judgment as to the unanswered residue; but the plaintiff may, at any term of court at or after which such demurrer or plea is filed or such part of the plaintiff’s claim is otherwise put in issue, before or after trial of the issue as to the part answered, provided the case shall not have been discontinued under some other provision of law, take judgment by nil dicit as to such unanswered residue.
Revisers’ Note.—This section is new. Its object is to prevent a case from being discontinued under the technical rules of the common law announced in Risher v. Wheeling Roofing Co., 57 W. Va. 149, and Southall v. Exchange Bank, 12 Grat. 312.
§10. Stay of Proceedings Until Other Action, Suit or Proceeding Decided.—Whenever it shall be made to appear to any court, or to the judge thereof in vacation, that a stay of proceedings in a case therein pending should be had until the decision of some other action, suit or proceeding in the same or another court, such court or judge shall make an order staying proceedings therein, upon such terms as may be prescribed in the order. But no application for such stay shall be entertained in vacation until reasonable notice thereof has been served upon the opposite party.(Code 1868, c. 136, §6; 1882, c. 124, §6; Code 1923, c. 136, §6.)
Revisers’ Note.—In the first sentence the words “any court” are inserted in lieu of “a circuit court,” in order that the section may apply to intermediate courts and other inferior courts of record.
§11. Execution of Order of Inquiry and Trial of Case by Court; Reduction of Number of Jurors.—The court, in an action at law, if neither party require a jury, or if the defendant has failed to appear and the plaintiff do not require a jury, shall ascertain the amount the plaintiff is entitled to recover in the action, if any, and render judgment accordingly. In any case, except a case of felony, in which a trial by jury would be otherwise proper, the parties or their counsel, by consent entered of record, may waive the right to have a jury, and thereupon the whole matter of law and fact shall be heard and determined, and judgment given by the court; or by like consent, the jury may consist of a number less than twelve, and in that case a verdict shall be as valid, and have the same effect, as if it had been found by a jury of twelve.(Code 1849, c. 162, §9; Code 1860, c. 162, §38; Code 1868, c. 116, §29, c. 131, §7; 1872-3, c. 47, §35; 1882, c. 83, §29, c. 120, §7; Code 1923, c. 116, §29, c. 131, §7.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is a composite of §7, c. 131, Code 1923, and §29, c. 116, Code 1923, the object being to bring under a single provision all general provisions relating to trial by the court in lieu of a jury. The words “and the plaintiff do not require a jury,” in the first sentence, are added in order to make an express term of the statute a statement which it is believed was intended to be implied in the original statute. In the latter sentence the words “a number less than twelve” are substituted for the word “seven” in §29, c. 116, Code 1923, no reason being perceived why the parties may not be permitted to agree to any number less than twelve, especially where one or more of the original jury of twelve have become incapacitated and it is desired to conclude the trial with the remaining jurors.
§12. Qualifications of Jurors; Examination on Voir Dire; Challenges.—Either party in any action or suit may, and the court shall on motion of such party, examine on oath any person who is called as a juror therein, to know whether he is a qualified juror, or is related to either party, or has any interest in the cause, or is sensible of any bias or prejudice therein; and the party objecting to the juror may introduce any other competent evidence in support of the objection; and if it shall appear to the court that such person is not a qualified juror or does not stand indifferent in the cause, another shall be called and placed in his stead for the trial of that cause. And in every case, unless it be otherwise specially provided by law, the plaintiff and defendant may each challenge four jurors peremptorily.(1852-3, c. 27, §23; Code 1860, c. 162, §21; Code 1868, c. 116, §17; 1872-3, c. 47, §23; 1882, c. 83, §17; 1890, c. 11, §17; 1891, c. 42, §17; Code 1923, c. 116, §17.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section, except the additional words in the last sentence, “unless it be otherwise specially provided by law,” is a literal transcription of the first and second sentences of §17, c. 116, Code 1923. The additional words are intended to cover such exceptions as juries in felony trials and special juries. The statute is transferred to this article because it is primarily concerned with trial procedure.
§13. Special Jury.—Any court may allow a special jury in any civil case, to be formed in the following manner: The court shall direct a panel of twenty jurors to be drawn by the clerk, in the presence of the court, from the box mentioned in section seven, article one, chapter fifty-two of this Code, who shall be summoned by the sheriff to attend on the day named in the order, from which number sixteen shall be chosen by lot; and the parties thereupon, the plaintiff's attorney beginning, shall alternately strike off one until the number be reduced to twelve, which number shall complete the jury for the trial of the case. The court may also allow a special jury in any civil case when the panel of drawn jurors is exhausted, upon the motion of either of the parties, to be summoned by the sheriff so far as may be required from the body of the county; but no such special jury shall be allowed in any case unless the court certifies of record that the interest of the parties so asking such jury will be promoted by the allowance of such special jury.(Code 1849, c. 162, §8; 1852-3, c. 27, §27; Code 1860, c. 162, §25; Code 1868, c. 116, §21; 1870, c. 20, §21; 1872-3, c. 47, §27; 1882, c. 83, §21; 1891, c. 42, §21; 1921, c. 69, §21; Code 1923, c. 116, §21.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is a redraft of the first paragraph of §21, c. 116, Code 1923, inserted here because it is primarily concerned with trial procedure. The words “upon the motion of all the parties thereto” are omitted, following §6005, Code Va. 1919, in order to leave the allowance of a special jury to the discretion of the court. The words “the plaintiff’s attorney beginning” are used in lieu of “beginning with the plaintiff’s attorney” for precision.
§14. Juror Having Matter of Fact to be Tried Disqualified.—No person shall serve as a juror at any term of a court during which he has any matter of fact to be tried by a jury, which shall have been, or is expected to be, tried during the same term.(Code 1849, c. 162, §3; Code 1860, c. 162, §36; Code 1868, c. 116, §28; 1872-3, c. 47, §34; 1882, c. 83, §28; Code 1923, c. 116, §28.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 28, c. 116, Code 1923, is made a part of this article because it is primarily concerned with trial procedure. The words “except in trials for felony,” formerly coming after “juror,” are omitted. See §6011, Code Va. 1919. This omission would seem to be advisable in pursuance of the opinion in Garret v. Patton, 81 W. Va. 771, where it is decided: “The fact that a party who has a suit to be tried by a jury at a particular term of court serves as a petit juror at that term, disqualifies all of the jurors with whom he has so served from sitting in his case tried at the same term of court.”
§15. Exceptions to Jurors After Sworn.—No exception shall be allowed against a juror, after he is sworn upon the jury, on account of his age or other legal disability, unless by leave of court.(Code 1849, c. 162, §4; 1852-3, c. 27, §24; Code 1860, c. 162, §22; Code 1868, c. 116, §18; 1872-3, c. 47, §24; 1882, c. 83, §18; 1891, c. 42, §18; Code 1923, c. 116, §18.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 18, c. 116, Code 1923, is placed in this article because it is concerned primarily with trial procedure.
§16. Irregularities Affecting the Jury; Time for Objection.—No irregularity in any writ of venire facias, or in the drawing, summoning, or impaneling of jurors, shall be sufficient to set aside a verdict, unless objection specifically pointing out such irregularity was made before the swearing of the jury, or unless the party making the objection was injured by the irregularity(1852-3, c. 27, §25; Code 1860, c. 162, §23; Code 1868, c. 116, §19; 1872-3, c. 47, §25; 1882, c. 83, §19; 1891, c. 42, §19; Code 1923, c. 116, §19.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 19, c. 116, Code 1923, is put here because it primarily pertains to trial procedure. The two exceptions introduced by “unless” are transposed in this revision in order to obtain a more logical sequence, but the meaning is not changed. The words “specifically pointing out such irregularity” are added after “objection,” following §6002, Code Va. 1919, in order to give the statute additional efficacy in accomplishing the purpose for which it seems primarily to have been intended.
§17. View by Jury.—The jury may, in any case, at the request of either party, be taken to view the premises or place in question, or any property, matter or thing relating to the controversy between the parties, when it shall appear to the court that such view is necessary to a just decision, and in such case the judge presiding at the trial may go with the jury and control the proceedings; and in a felony case the judge and the clerk shall go with the jury and the judge shall control the proceedings, and the accused shall likewise be taken with the jury or, if under recognizance, shall attend the view and his recognizance shall be construed to require such attendance. The party making the motion, in a civil case, shall advance a sum sufficient to defray the expenses of the jury and the officers who attend them in taking the view, which expenses shall be afterwards taxed like other legal costs.(Code 1849, c. 162, §10; Code 1860, c. 162, §39; Code 1868, c. 116, §30; 1872-3, c. 47, §36; 1882, c. 83, §30; Code 1923, c. 116, §30.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 30, c. 116, Code 1923, is put here because it primarily concerns trial procedure.
§18. Disclosure by Juror of Knowledge of Facts in Issue.—A juror knowing anything relative to a fact in issue shall disclose the same in open court, but not to the jury out of court; and the court shall inform the jury of this provision.(Code 1849, c. 162, §11; Code 1860, c. 162, §40; Code 1868, c. 116, §31; 1872-3, c. 47, §37; 1882, c. 83, §31; Code 1923, c. 116, §31.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 31, c. 116, Code 1923, is put here because it is primarily concerned with trial procedure.
§19. Instructions to Jury; Form and Manner of Giving.—Upon the trial of any case, civil or criminal, before a jury, either party may pray the court to give to the jury any instruction which has been reduced to writing and submitted to the other party. Such other party may object to the giving of such instruction. Every such instruction which shall propound correctly law applicable to the case not covered by other instructions shall be given by the court to the jury as a part of a written charge by the court to the jury, as hereinafter provided, in case such charge be given, and otherwise shall be given as an independent instruction. The court may, on its own motion, whether requested or not, in writing define to the jury the issues involved and instruct them on the law governing the case, but all such instructions shall first be submitted to counsel on each side with opportunity to object thereto. In lieu of the giving of separate instructions as herein provided, the court may in writing instruct upon the law governing the case, putting such instructions in the form of an orderly and connected charge, incorporating therein the substance and, as far as may be, the language of the instructions prayed upon either side or prepared by the court on its own motion, with correctly propounded law applicable to the case, which written charge shall first be submitted to counsel on each side with opportunity to specify and object to any part thereof. No objections shall lie to the action of the court upon any instruction if the law to which it relates shall have been correctly stated by the court in such charge. The action of the court upon every instruction prayed, whether such instruction be given as asked or as modified, independently or as part of the court’s charge, or be refused, shall be noted upon the margin thereof by the judge over his signature. Either party may except to any and every ruling by the court adverse to the prayer or objection by him with respect to any such instruction.(1915, c. 72, §22; Code 1923, c. 131, §22.)
Revisers’ Note.—Acts of 1915, c. 72, enacted this and the three following sections and repealed c. 38, Acts 1907, relating to instructions to juries. The words “written charge,” after “which,” near the end of the fifth sentence, are new, and are added to make the provision more explicit. The phrase, “specify and object to any,” is substituted for the phrase “object to any specified,” after the words, “opportunity to,” near the end of the fifth sentence, for precision in the language. At the end of the next to the last sentence, “signature” is substituted for “initials.”
§20. Reading Instructions to Jury; Instructions Part of the Record.—All instructions given shall be read by the court to the jury as the action and ruling of the court, without reference to or disclosing the party by whom they may have been prayed. Every instruction or charge in writing read to the jury and every instruction or charge in writing prayed by any party and refused by the court, provided, in either case, that such instruction or charge have a notation thereon showing the action of the court with reference thereto over the signature of the judge, as provided in the preceding section, shall, together with the objections and exceptions thereto, indorsed thereon, be a part of the record in the case and shall be included and copied in any transcript of the record without the formality of a bill of exceptions or any formal certification provided for in subsequent sections of this article.(1915, c. 72, §23; 1921, c. 68; Code 1923, c. 131, §23.)
Revisers’ Note.—The word “given,” added after “instructions” in the first line, is new. The words “in writing,” after “charge,” near the beginning of the second sentence, are new. The word “when” formerly appearing before “read,” near the beginning of the second sentence, is omitted. The words in the second sentence beginning with “and every instruction” and concluding with “preceding section” are new and are added so as to make all instructions prayed or given a part of the record without the necessity for any bill of exceptions or formal certification. Under §23, c. 131, Code 1923, only instructions read to the jury were so a part of the record. The word “together” before “with,” in the second sentence, is new. The word “or” between “objections” and “exceptions” is changed to “and.” The concluding words, beginning with “or any formal certification,” are new. The object is to provide an informal method of making instructions a part of the record, additional to the method hereinafter provided for by bill of exceptions.
§21. Time for Examining Instructions, Objecting Thereto, and Settlement Thereof.—The court shall, in the absence of any rule for such purpose prescribed by the supreme court of appeals, under the provisions of section four, article one, chapter fifty-one of this Code, by suitable general rules, prescribe the stages of the trial, at which instructions must be presented to the opposing counsel and to the court, at which objections may be made to charges and instructions prepared by the court, and at which the instructions and charge shall be settled by the court and read by it to the jury; all of which being subject to the power of the court in a particular case to make exceptions to such rules when good cause therefor shall appear and justice may so require.(1915, c. 72, §24; Code 1923, c. 131, §24.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “in the absence of any rule for such purpose prescribed by the supreme court of appeals, under the provisions of section four, article one, chapter fifty-one of this Code” are new.
§22. Oral Instructions by Court; Written Instructions During Trial.—Nothing in the three next preceding sections contained shall affect the power of the court during the trial of the case to instruct the jury orally concerning matters not proper for their consideration or concerning the conduct of any person in connection with the trial; or, otherwise, on its own motion to instruct the jury in writing on the law of the case at any stage during the trial, subject to the right of exception by either party.(1915, c. 72, §25; Code 1923, c. 131, §25.)
§23. Papers Taken by Jury.—Depositions or other papers read in evidence may, by leave of the court, be carried from the bar by the jury.(Code 1849, c. 177, §11; Code 1860, c. 177, §11; Code 1868, c. 131, §12; 1882, c. 120, §12; Code 1923, c. 131, §12.)
§24. Argument of Counsel.—Not more than two counsel shall argue in a civil case on the same side, unless by leave of court, and the argument of each counsel shall not occupy more than two hours, unless by like leave. The court may, in its reasonable discretion, still further limit the time of argument on each side.(Code 1849, c. 177, §9; Code 1860, c. 177, §9; Code 1868, c. 131, §10; 1882, c. 120, §10; Code 1923, c. 131, §10.)
§25. Time Limitation as to Nonsuit.—A party shall not be allowed to suffer a nonsuit, unless he do so before the jury retire from the bar.(Code 1849, c. 177, §10; Code 1860, c. 177, §10; Code 1868, c. 131, §11; 1882, c. 120, §11; Code 1923, c. 131, §11.)
§26. How Verdict May be Affected by Faulty Count.—When there are several counts in a declaration, one or more of which are faulty, the defendant may demur to the faulty count or counts, or move the court to instruct the jury to disregard them. If he does neither, and entire damages be found, judgment shall be entered against the defendant for the damages found, if any count be good, although others be faulty, unless the court can plainly see that the verdict could not have been found on the good count. If he demurs to the faulty count, or moves the court to instruct the jury to disregard it, and his demurrer or motion is overruled, and entire damages be found, and it can not be seen on which count the verdict was founded, if the jury has been discharged the verdict shall be set aside, but if it is manifest that the verdict could not have been found on the bad count, the verdict shall be allowed to stand. If the jury has not been discharged, the court shall send it back with instructions to designate on which count of the declaration its verdict is found.(Code 1849, c. 177, §12; Code 1860, c. 177, §12; Code 1868, c. 131, §13; 1882, c. 120, §13; Code 1923, c. 131, §13.)
Revisers’ Note.—Section 6258, Code Va. 1919, with verbal changes, is here substituted for §13, c. 131, Code 1923. Substitution of the Virginia statute works the following changes in §13, c. 131, Code 1923: The words “in a declaration” are added after “counts”; the words “or more” are added after “one”; “is” is changed to “are”; the words “demur to the faulty count or counts, or,” are added after “may”; “ask” is changed to “move”; “it” is changed to “them”; the clause coming after the semicolon is omitted and the Virginia statute substituted therefor. The reasons for making these changes are fully explained in Burks’ Pleading and Practice (2d ed.), §293; particularly in the note beginning on page 542.
§27. Interest on Claim and Verdict.—The jury, in any action founded on contract, may allow interest on the principal due, or any part thereof, and in all cases they shall find the aggregate of principal and interest due at the time of the trial, after allowing all proper credits, payments and sets-off; and judgment shall be entered for such aggregate with interest from the date of the verdict.(Code 1849, c. 177, §14; Code 1860, c. 177, §14; Code 1868, c. 131, §14; 1882, c. 120, §14; Code 1923, c. 131, §14.)
Revisers’ Note.—The word “proper” before “credits” is new.
§28. New Trial.—In any civil case or proceeding, the court before which a trial by jury is had may grant a new trial, unless it be otherwise specially provided. A new trial may be granted as well where the damages are too small as where they are excessive. Not more than two new trials shall be granted to the same party in the same cause on the ground that the verdict is contrary to the evidence, either by the trial court or the appellate court, or both.(Code 1849, c. 177, §15; Code 1860, c. 177, §15; Code 1868, c. 131, §15; 1882, c. 120, §15; Code 1923, c. 131, §15.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “or proceeding,” after “case” in the first line, are taken from §6260, Code Va. 1919. The latter part of the last sentence, beginning with the words “on the ground that the verdict is contrary to the evidence, either by the trial court or appellate court, or both,” is taken from §6260, Code Va. 1919. These words are added to give an express meaning to the statute which must have been intended in its original enactment, but which, as appears from Watterson v. Moore, 23 W. Va. 404, was not carried into the language. See Burks’ Pleading and Practice (2d ed.), §297.
§29. Judgment or Decree to be for Aggregate of Principal and Interest to Date of Recovery.—When there is a recovery on a bond conditioned for the payment of money, as well as in all cases where a judgment or decree is rendered or made for the payment of money, it shall be for the aggregate of principal and interest due at the date of the verdict, if there be one, otherwise at the date of the judgment or decree, with interest thereon from the date of such verdict, if there be one, otherwise from the date of such judgment or decree, except in cases where it is otherwise provided. In any action founded on a tort, if the verdict be for the plaintiff, the judgment shall be for the amount of the verdict with interest thereon from the date of the verdict.(Code 1849, c. 177, §16; Code 1860, c. 177, §16; Code 1868, c. 131, §16; 1882, c. 120, §16; Code 1923, c. 131, §16.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “the date of such verdict, if there be one, otherwise from the date of such judgment or decree,” near the end of the first sentence, are substituted for the words “such date,” because the latter expression is indefinite. The last sentence is new and is intended to settle, in accord with the latest decisions, a controversy which has prevailed in the West Virginia decisions as to whether interest in a tort action shall be allowed from the date of the verdict or the date of the judgment. See Long v. Pocahontas Consolidated Collieries Co., 83 W. Va. 380; Wehrle v. Wheeling Traction Co., 85 W. Va. 398. See also 26 W. Va. Law Quarterly 193, where the cases are collected and discussed.
§30. Action on Contract for Payments in Installments, or on Bond With a Collateral Condition.—In an action on an annuity bond, or a bond for money payable by installments, where there are further payments of the annuity, or further installments to become due after the commencement of the action, or in any other action for a penalty for the nonperformance of any condition, covenant or agreement, the plaintiff may assign as many breaches as he thinks fit. If there be judgment for the plaintiff on a demurrer, or by confession, or by default, or nil dicit, he may so assign after such judgment. The jury impaneled in any such action shall ascertain the damages sustained, or the sum due by reason of the breaches assigned, including interest thereon to the date of the verdict, and judgment shall be entered for what is so ascertained: Provided, That if the action be on such annuity bond, or a bond for money payable by installments, such judgment shall also be for such further sums as may afterward be assessed or be found due upon a scire facias assigning a further breach. Such scire facias may be sued out from time to time by any person injured, against the defendant or his personal representative, and, for what may be assessed or found due upon the new breach or breaches assigned, execution may be awarded.(Code 1849, c. 177, §17; Code 1860, c. 177, §17; Code 1868, c. 131, §17; 1882, c. 120, §17; Code 1923, c. 131, §17.)
§31. Interest on Judgment or Decree.—Every judgment or decree for the payment of money, except where it is otherwise provided by law, shall bear interest from the date thereof, whether it be so stated in the judgment or decree or not.(Code 1849, c. 177, §18; Code 1860, c. 177, §18; Code 1868, c. 131, §18; 1882, c. 120, §18; Code 1923, c. 131, §18.)
§32. Recovery Against One or More Contract Defendants.—In an action or motion, founded on contract, against two or more defendants, the fact that one or more of the defendants, at any stage of the cause or for any reason, is found not liable on the contract shall not prevent the plaintiff from having, as if the motion or action were an action founded on tort, verdict and judgment, or judgment alone, as the case may be, against any other defendant or defendants who are liable; nor shall the fact that a verdict is set aside as to one or more of the defendants in such action or motion as contrary to the evidence prevent the plaintiff from having judgment on such verdict as to any other defendant or defendants found liable thereby.(Code 1849, c. 177, §19; Code 1860, c. 177, §19; Code 1868, c. 131, §19; 1882, c. 120, §19; Code 1923, c. 131, §19.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section, beginning with the words “the fact that,” is substantially new. It seems that the language of §19, c. 131, Code 1923, failed to accomplish the results which the legislature must have intended. See Scott v. Newell, 69 W. Va. 118, 122-123; 28 W. Va. Law Quarterly, 268-275. Hence it is deemed advisable to abandon the original language of the statute and substitute therefor phraseology that it is hoped will not be found indefinite. It will be noted that the effect of this section is to supplement the effect of §34, art. 4 of this chapter providing that no action shall abate or be defeated because of a misjoinder of parties.
§33. Judgment or Decree Against Personal Representative or Committee; Costs.—A judgment or decree against any person as the personal representative of a decedent or committee of a convict or insane person, for a debt due from such decedent, convict or insane person, may, without taking an account of the transactions of such representative or committee, be ordered to be paid out of the personal estate of such decedent, convict or insane person, in, or which shall come to, the hands of the representative or committee to be administered. When the court enters of record that, if he had prudently discharged his duty, the suit or motion would not have been brought or made, the judgment or decree, so far as it is for costs, shall be ordered to be paid out of his own estate.(Code 1849, c. 177, §20; Code 1860, c. 177, §20; Code 1868, c. 131, §20; 1882, c. 120, §20; Code 1923, c. 131, §20.)
§34. Issuance of Executions During Term.—Any circuit court or other court of record, after the fifteenth day of its term, may make a general order allowing executions to issue on judgments or decrees after ten days from their date, although the term at which they are rendered be not ended. For special cause it may, in any particular case, except the same from such order, or allow an execution thereon at an earlier period.(Code 1849, c. 177, §21; Code 1860, c. 177, §21; Code 1868, c. 131, §21; 1882, c. 120, §21; Code 1923, c. 131, §21.)
§35. Bills of Exceptions.—In the trial of a case at law in which a writ of error or supersedeas lies to the court of appeals, a party may except to any action or opinion of the court and tender a bill of exceptions; and if the action or opinion of the court be upon any question involving the evidence or any part thereof, either upon a motion for a new trial or otherwise, the court shall certify all the evidence touching such question, and the judge shall sign any such bill of exceptions (if the truth of the case be fairly stated therein), and it shall be made a part of the record in the case, and the whole of the evidence so certified shall be considered by the court of appeals, both upon application for and hearing of the writ of error or supersedeas. If any judge refuse to sign such bill of exceptions, he may be compelled to do so by the court of appeals by mandamus; in which case the bill of exceptions shall be a part of the record to the same extent as if it had been signed by the judge at the proper time. Any party may avail himself of any error appearing on the record, by which he is prejudiced, without obtaining a formal bill of exceptions, provided he objects or excepts on the record to the action of the court complained of, and provided it is such a matter as can be considered without a formal bill of exceptions. In all cases an objection noted on the record shall have the same effect as if followed by a formal exception to the ruling of the court thereon, and no exception shall be necessary in order to permit the party so objecting to avail himself thereof. Any bill of exceptions may be tendered to the judge and signed by him, in term or in vacation, at any time before final judgment is entered, or within sixty days after the adjournment of the term at which such judgment is entered; or if such judgment shall be entered in vacation, then within sixty days from the time when such judgment is entered; and the court or judge may, by order entered of record, extend the time within which such bill may be tendered, signed and certified beyond such period of sixty days. If such bill of exceptions be signed by the judge in vacation, he shall certify the same to the clerk of the court, who shall enter the certification upon the order book of such court, and any such bill of exceptions so made in vacation shall be a part of the record and have the same effect as if made in term.(Code 1849, c. 177, §8; Code 1860, c. 177, §8; Code 1868, c. 131, §9; 1882, c. 120, §9; 1891, c. 100, §9; Code 1923, c. 131, §9.)
Revisers’ Note.—The third sentence of §9, c. 131, Code 1923, is modified by the third sentence of the revised section in accordance with the holding in Perry v. Horn & Carroll, 22 W. Va. 381. The last sentence of said §9 provides that the bill may be certified “within thirty days after the adjournment of the term.” This language is open to construction as to whether the term referred to is the term of the trial proper or some other term, particularly the term at which the final judgment is entered. The latter construction is adhered to in Barker v. Stevenson, 67 W. Va. 490. The next to the last sentence of the revised section carries this construction into the statute, thus following §6252, Code Va. 1919, except that the latter section provides that the bill shall be certified within sixty days from the “time at which the judgment is entered.” Additional provision is made in the latter part of the sentence as revised for certifying bills of exceptions when the final judgment is entered in vacation, as now apparently may be done under §39 of this article. In pursuance of §6252, Code Va. 1919, the time period of thirty days is extended to sixty days, and a provision is added permitting the court or judge to extend the time. The last sentence of the revised section provides that the clerk shall enter the “certification” upon the record, whereas said §9 seems to direct the clerk to enter the bill of exceptions itself on the record, which was not the legislative intent. See Bank of Ravenswood v. Wetzel, 58 W. Va. 1, holding that the vacation order alone is intended to be recorded. The words “bill of” are added before “exceptions so made” in the last sentence to make explicit the obvious meaning of the statute.
Committee’s Note.—The fourth sentence of the revised section is new.
§36. Certificate in Lieu of Bill of Exceptions.—In lieu of the bill of exceptions provided by the preceding section, it shall be sufficient that any matter intended to become a part of the record in any case shall be certified as provided in the following provisions of this section:
(a) Certificate of all the evidence and proceedings reported.—Whenever, for any purposes of a review by any appellate court of any action, ruling, order, judgment, or matter arising in the course of the trial or hearing of a cause, a consideration of the evidence or any part thereof, or of any other matter properly appearing in the transcript of the stenographic notes prepared by the stenographic reporter who took notes of the evidence and proceedings, may be necessary for a decision upon an appeal or writ of error of any question involved in such review, and any party seeking to bring matters into the record shall desire that all the evidence and proceedings so noted by such reporter shall become a part of the record, the trial judge shall, if in his opinion such transcript be a true report of the evidence and proceedings, certify, over his signature, such transcript or a copy thereof. Such certificate shall be inserted or appended at the end of such transcript and may be substantially as follows:
(b) Certificate of part of the evidence or proceedings reported.—If the party seeking to bring matters into the record shall desire, in lieu of making the entire transcript a part of the record as provided in the preceding subdivision, to make some specific part or parts of the evidence or proceedings properly recorded in the stenographic notes a part of the record, the reporter shall transcribe such part or parts, and the trial judge shall, if in his opinion such transcript state the truth, certify, over his signature, such transcript thereof. If the part or parts of the evidence or proceedings so transcribed shall not, as so detached from the residue of the evidence or proceedings, be alone sufficient and intelligible for the purpose of bringing to the attention of the appellate court the questions of error intended to be reviewed, then it shall be proper to supplement such partial transcript with any explanation which the trial judge shall deem proper. No particular form shall be required in such explanation, and it may either precede or follow, and may be appended to, such partial transcript. The certificate of the trial judge under this subdivision may be substantially as follows:
(c) Certificate of exceptions as to miscellaneous matters.—In the case of an exception by any party to any action, ruling, order or judgment of any trial court, or of any other matter arising in the course of the trial or hearing of a cause, and not reported in the official transcript of the evidence and proceedings, or otherwise made a part of the record, it shall be sufficient, instead of a bill of exceptions, that the trial judge shall certify that any party excepted to such action, ruling, order, judgment or matter. In any such case, the body of such certificate shall set out the subject matter of such action, ruling, order, judgment or matter, in such manner as to make intelligible any question of error arising upon such exception, and shall note the fact that the party excepted, but no particular formality in the statement thereof shall be necessary. Such certificate may conclude substantially as follows:
(d) Effect of certification in accordance with this section.—In all cases, in order to preserve of record to all intents and purposes any exception to any action, ruling, order or judgment of the trial court, or any matter arising in the course of the trial or hearing of a cause, it shall be sufficient that the trial judge, on the application of any party, shall certify the same simply and substantially in accordance with the provisions of this section;
(e) When certificate may be signed.—Any certificate to the intents and purposes of this section may be signed by the trial judge, in term or in vacation, at any time before final judgment is entered, or within sixty days after the adjournment of the term at which such judgment is entered; or if such judgment be entered in vacation, then within sixty days from the time when such judgment is entered; and the court or judge may, by order entered of record, extend the time within which such certificate may be signed beyond such period of sixty days.
Revisers’ Note.—This section is new. Part of the substance is taken from §6253, Code Va. 1919. The object is to supply a less complicated method of making exceptions a part of the record than that provided by the formal bill of exceptions, and at the same time to leave the old provisions in the preceding section establishing formal bills of exceptions in full force and effect for the benefit of those practioners who are familiar with and prefer that method of procedure. This course was pursued in the Virginia revision of 1919. In the note to §6252, Code Va. 1919, the revisers say: “It is believed that, by giving the practitioner his election between the two methods of preserving exceptions, and by making the time for signing fixed, certain and definite, and the same in both methods, the saving of points made in the trial courts has been made as simple and as safe from the probability of fatal defects as could be reasonably desired.” It will be noted that §20 of this article provides for making instructions a part of the record merely by informal notations over the signature of the judge. Hence instructions are not specifically provided for in this section. This section is constructed on the theory that, where any matter involving an exception has already been recorded by the stenographic reporter, the simplest and safest method of bringing it into the record is to permit an informal certification or approval by the trial judge of a literal transcript thereof. It will be noted that it is optional with the party whether, for any specific purpose, he will have the whole or only a part of the matters recorded by the reporter certified; and if he shall have only a part certified, the extent of the part. Subdivision (c) is intended to cover those instances where the exception involves matters not recorded by the reporter and, hence, where the body of the certificate itself must narrate the subject matter of the exception.
§37. How Certificate of Trial Judge or Bills of Exceptions to be Considered; Instructions in Transcript Presumed to be all Given by the Court.—The appellate court in reviewing, upon a writ of error or supersedeas to a final judgment, or upon an appeal from a final decree, of an inferior court in a cause, any question arising upon the record in such cause, shall in every instance, wherever necessary to a decision of such question, consider any exception, the evidence or any part thereof introduced on the trial or hearing of the cause, or any other matter preserved of record in such cause by the certificate of the trial judge or by bill of exceptions as provided by the two preceding sections, or by the signature of the trial judge as provided by section twenty of this article; nor in the determination of any such question shall it be necessary to enable the appellate court to consider any other exception, or the evidence or any part thereof introduced at the trial or hearing of the cause, or any other matter preserved of record in the cause by the certificate of the trial judge or by bill of exceptions as provided by the two preceding sections or by the signature of the trial judge as provided in section twenty of this article, that there shall be any express reference in the certificate or bill of exceptions or noted on any instruction under which such question may arise to the certificate or bill of any other exception, or of the evidence or any part thereof introduced at the trial or hearing, or of any other matter preserved of record in the cause as provided in the two preceding sections of this article, or to any instruction or notation thereon made a part of the record pursuant to section twenty of this article; but all such separate matters, however made a part of the record, shall be read and considered together as component parts of one entire record. Any instruction or instructions appearing in the transcript of the record certified by the clerk of the trial court as given shall be presumed to be the only instruction or instructions given; or if it shall not appear from such transcript that any instruction was given, it shall be presumed that none was given, unless, in either case, it shall affirmatively appear otherwise from such transcript, or upon a suggestion by any party, either to the trial court or to the appellate court, that an instruction or instructions given have been omitted from such transcript. But nothing in this or the previous section shall be construed as compelling the appellate court to notice or review any matter arising upon a specific exception noted in the transcript of the evidence and proceedings reported unless such exception be specifically pointed out in assignments of error, brief of counsel, or otherwise specifically brought to the attention of the court.
Revisers’ Note.—This section is new. The first sentence is constructed largely from the substance of subdivision (e), §6253, Code Va. 1919. One of the principal objects sought to be accomplished in the first sentence is to abolish the technical rule heretofore prevailing to the effect that there can be no reference, except express reference, from one bill of exceptions to another. See 4 Minor’s Institutes, 745-6, 878. The second sentence of the section is intended to obviate the requirement formerly prevailing that it must expressly and affirmatively appear that all instructions given have been brought into the record in order that a party may raise a question of error as to the refusal of a good instruction. See Teter v. Franklin Insurance Co., 74 W. Va. 344. Under the statute as now constructed, a party seeking appellate relief because of the refusal of a good instruction, if his exception be properly noted on the instruction as provided in §20 of this article, need confine his diligence solely to seeing that all instructions given are brought into the record. The final sentence is in accord with the views expressed in Hinton Milling Co. v. New River Milling Co., 78 W. Va. 314.
§38. Hearing of Chancery Causes in Open Court; Oral Testimony; Bills of Exception; Transcript for Appeal.—Chancery causes may, by leave of the court, and by agreement of counsel for the parties, be heard and determined in open court; but in cases so heard the witnesses shall personally appear before the judge to testify orally, unless their depositions shall be taken out of court, under rules obtaining, by agreement of counsel, or by order of the judge made for good cause. And the rules of evidence, procedure and practice now in force, and as hereafter changed, shall apply in taking such evidence, except that bills of exception shall not be necessary in any cases wherein the same are not now required. The evidence so taken in such chancery causes shall be taken down in shorthand by the official reporter or other reporter agreed to by the parties in interest as part of his duties, and transcribed by him as provided for in respect to other matters; and like reporting charges for chancery causes and law causes shall be made, collected and accounted for. In case either party desire to appeal such chancery cause he shall, within ninety days after final or appealable decree, file the transcript of evidence which shall have the force and effect now accorded to depositions in chancery causes.(1917, c. 65, §1; Code 1923, c. 131, §26.)
Committee’s Note.—In the last sentence of the section the word “file” is inserted in lieu of “require,” and the words “when furnished” are omitted, in order to clarify the meaning.
§39. Hearing of Motion; Action or Chancery Cause in Vacation; Certification, Entry and Effect of Order or Decree.—Any motion, civil action at law, or chancery cause, pending in a circuit court, or any other court, or before the judge thereof, having jurisdiction of the subject matter, or any matter of law, or fact, arising in such motion, action at law, or chancery cause, may, by consent of parties, either in person or by counsel, next friend or guardian ad litem, in term time entered of record, or by like consent in vacation, be submitted to the judge of such court for such decision and decree, judgment, or order, therein in vacation as might be made in term; but such court may, either in term or vacation, without such consent, when it desires time to consider its judgment as to any motion, action at law, chancery cause, or matter of law, or fact arising therein, which has been fully argued and submitted, direct such motion, action at law, chancery cause, or matter of law or fact, to be submitted for decision, and decree, judgment or order in vacation: Provided, however, That no such consent shall be necessary as to any defendant against whom the cause, action or motion has been matured by order of publication, and who has not appeared by motion, demurrer, plea, or answer. When such consent is in vacation, the judge shall certify the fact to the clerk of the court in which the motion, action at law, or chancery cause is pending, to be entered in the law or chancery order book, as the case may be. The judge acting in vacation under this section, in addition to the other powers herein given to him, shall have authority to do any and all things, and to enter all judgments, decrees or orders in behalf of or at the request of a party desiring to take an appeal or to apply for a writ of error, that the court might do or enter in term time. The judge shall certify the judgments, orders and decrees made by him in vacation to the clerk aforesaid, to be entered in like manner as the vacation consent. All judgments, orders and decrees, so made and entered, shall have the same force and effect as if made and entered in term, except that in case of a judgment, order or decree for money the same shall be effective only from the time of day at which it is received in the clerk’s office to be entered of record.(1917, c. 65, §2; Code 1923, c. 131, §27.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “in a” after “motion” at the beginning of the section are omitted to make the language conform to that of the rest of the section, and, in the same sentence, the words “before the” are added before “judge” to supply what seems to have been an inadvertent omission. Near the middle of the section, “against” is inserted between “defendant” and “whom” to supply what seems to have been an inadvertent omission in the original statute.
§40. Contempt Proceedings in Vacation.—The judge of every circuit court or other court of record having jurisdiction to try or hear actions at law or suits in equity shall have the same power in vacation that he has in term to punish disobedience of and enforce obedience to any decree or order made in his court and for such purpose may issue all necessary process. The orders and proceedings in such case shall be certified and entered of record as provided in the preceding section and shall be as valid as if made or had and entered in term.(1917, c. 65, §3; Code 1923, c. 131, §28.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “or other court of record having jurisdiction to try or hear actions at law or suits in equity” are new. After the word “term,” in the first sentence, the words “to issue process of contempt” are omitted, and the concluding words of the sentence, “and for such purpose may issue all necessary process,” are added. The object of these changes is to eliminate all doubt as to power to try and punish the contempt in vacation.
§41. Certification and Entry of Vacation Orders.—All orders and decrees made by a judge out of court in a cause pending in court shall be certified by him to the clerk of the court in which the same is pending, and be entered by such clerk in the proper order book.(Code 1868, c. 112, §11; 1872-3, c. 15, §13; 1881, c. 3, §10; Code 1923, c. 112, §10.)
Article 7. Procedure on Orders of Reference.
Revisers’ Note.—Sections 1 and 2, c. 129, Code 1923, are covered in §§1, 2, art. 5, c. 51.
§1. To What Commissioner or Person Accounts to be Referred; Territorial Jurisdiction; Recommittal.—Accounts to be taken in any case shall be referred to a commissioner appointed under the provisions of sections one and two, article five, chapter fifty-one of this Code, to be named in the decree or order unless the parties interested agree, or the court shall deem it proper, that they be referred to some other person especially appointed a commissioner. Every commissioner shall examine and report upon such accounts and matters as may be referred to him by the court and such report may be recommitted to such commissioner, or to some other commissioner, for other and final report.
The court in any decree or order of reference may authorize and empower the commissioner, to whom such cause or action is referred, to take proof and hear testimony touching the matters referred to him in any county within this State; and, for such purpose when so authorized, the jurisdiction and authority of such commissioner shall extend throughout the State.
Whenever the commissioner to whom any such cause or action was referred has made up and filed his report, and there appears therefrom or from the evidence filed therewith, or from the pleadings and evidence of the whole case, sufficient facts upon which the court can decree or enter judgment, the same shall not be recommitted for further report, but a decree or judgment shall be entered therein, according to the law and the very right of the case as disclosed from the whole record.(Code 1849, c. 175, §3; Code 1860, c. 175, §4; Code 1868, c. 129, §3; 1872-3, c. 138, §4; 1881, c. 34, §§4, 5; 1882, c. 57, §3; Code 1923, c. 129, §3.)
Revisers’ Note.—As §§1 and 2, c. 129, Code 1923, relating to appointment and qualification of commissioners, are transferred to art. 5, c. 51, the words “appointed under the provisions of sections one and two, article five, chapter fifty-one of this Code,” are substituted for the words “so appointed.” At the end of the first sentence, the words “especially appointed a commissioner” are added.
§2. Order of Reference Before Case on Docket.—The judge of any court having jurisdiction to try or hear chancery causes may, in vacation or in term time, though the cause be not upon the court docket, make an order in any cause pending in his court at any time after process has been duly served on the defendants or such of them as may appear to be interested in the subject matter upon which the commissioner is to report, or at any time after such defendants have entered their appearance in such cause, referring the same to a commissioner for the purpose of stating any proper account or reporting upon any matter as to which it is proper there should be a commissioner’s report in such cause. But no such order of reference shall be made in any cause until reasonable notice in writing has been served upon the opposite party, or his attorney, of the time and place of making application therefor.(Code 1849, c. 175, §5; Code 1860, c. 175, §6; Code 1868, c. 129, §5; 1877, c. 96, §5; 1881, c. 34, §7; 1882, c. 57, §5; Code 1923, c. 129, §5.)
Revisers’ Note.—At the beginning of the section, the words “any court having jurisdiction to try or hear chancery causes” are substituted for the words “The judge of a circuit court, or of a court of limited jurisdiction for any incorporated city, town or village.” At the end of the section the words “application therefor” are used in lieu of “said motion” to con form to the language of the section.
§3. Notice by Commissioner.—The court ordering an account to be taken may direct that the time and place of taking the same be published once a week for three successive weeks in some newspaper published in the county, if one is so published, to be designated by the party at whose instance such publication is made or his attorney, but if no paper be so designated, then in such paper as the court may direct; or if no newspaper be published in the county, or if none therein will make the publication at the legal rate or for the time required, then in such newspaper as the court may prescribe; or the court may dispense with the publication, and require the notice to be posted at the front door of the courthouse of such county and at least four other public places in such county, twenty days before the time set forth for taking the account. Such publication or such posting shall be equivalent to personal service on the parties or any of them. In any case where all persons whose interests may be affected by the proceedings before a commissioner are known, it shall be sufficient that, in lieu of such publication or posting of the notice as aforesaid, such persons, or their counsel (or one of their counsel, if there be more than one), be served with such notice in the manner provided by section one, article two of this chapter.(Code 1849, c. 175, §4; Code 1860, c. 175, §5; Code 1868, c. 129, §4; 1881, c. 34, §6; 1882, c. 57, §4; Code 1923, c. 129, §4.)
Revisers’ Note.—The period of publication is changed from four weeks to three weeks. The provision in §4, c. 129, Code 1923, requiring posting of the notice in addition to publication is eliminated. In lieu of the provision in said §4 that, where no newspaper is published in the county, the notice shall be published in some newspaper having general circulation in the county, it is provided that the court shall designate the newspaper. This change is made in order to make this section conform to §24, art. 3 of this chapter. The provision that, if no newspaper in the county will make the publication at the legal rate or for the time required, the court shall prescribe the paper, is taken from §15, c. 138, Code 1923. The last sentence of this section is new.
§4. Instruction of Commissioner by Judge.—A commissioner who doubts as to any point which arises before him, in taking an account to be returned to any court, may, in writing, submit the point to such court, or the judge thereof in vacation, who may instruct him thereon.(Code 1849, c. 175, §6; Code 1860, c. 175, §7; Code 1868, c. 129, §6; 1881, c. 34, §8; 1882, c. 57, §6; Code 1923, c. 129, §6.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “in vacation,” after “thereof,” adopted from §6182, Code Va. 1919, are new. They make more definite what has manifestly been the intent of the statute.
§5. When Account to be Taken.—Ever commissioner to whom a cause is referred shall, immediately after the adjournment of each term of the court, proceed to take all accounts referred to him by any order or decree of the court, and all adjournments and postponements of the taking of any account shall be for good cause to be shown by the affidavit of the party making the application, which shall be filed with the papers in the cause; and if the commissioner unreasonably delays his report, he shall receive no compensation for the same.(1882, c. 57, §8; 1895, c. 8, §8; Code 1923, c. 129, §8.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is formed from the last sentence of §8, c. 129, Code 1923, (§8 of this article). It was added to the latter section by Acts 1882. The change noted here is made to secure a better sequence. The rest of said §8 is covered in §8 of this article. At the beginning of the section, the words, “Every commissioner to whom a cause is referred,” are substituted for the word “He”.
§6. Proof of Debt Before Commissioner by Affidavit; Counter Affidavit.—Every creditor in any chancery cause pending in any court before a commissioner in chancery under a decree of reference in such cause may establish his debt or demand against the debtor, if it be for the recovery of money due on contract, by filing before the commissioner with such debt or demand, completely itemized where it is upon an account, the affidavit or affidavits of any person or persons competent and not disqualified by law (which competency the affidavit or affidavits shall affirmatively show in every case where the creditor is seeking to prove a debt or demand against a deceased debtor or his estate) to testify as a witness or as witnesses before the commissioner about or concerning the debt or demand in question, such affidavit or affidavits stating every essential element necessary to constitute proof of such debt or demand, the same as though affiant or affiants had testified before the commissioner as a witness or as witnesses in person, unless the debtor, his personal representative, or any party, or creditor, or other person interested shall file before the commissioner a counter affidavit denying the correctness of the debt or demand, as a whole or in part, or the validity of any lien by which it is secured, in which case the creditor presenting such debt or demand shall be required to produce his witness or witnesses before the commissioner, reasonable notice of which shall be given in writing to the creditor or his attorney, and the taking of the testimony relative to such debt or demand, or the validity of such lien, as the case may be, shall be proceeded with before the commissioner in like manner as if no affidavit or affidavits had been filed. In every case, however, where such debt or demand is evidenced by a contract in writing, or by a judgment or decree, or is secured by a lien, such affidavit or affidavits alone shall not be sufficient to establish such debt or demand; but such creditor shall also produce before such commissioner as additional proof the written evidence of such debt and shall file the same or a copy thereof certified by the commissioner, or a certified copy of such judgment or decree, and, if such judgment or decree be recorded in the judgment lien docket, a certified transcript of such recordation; and, if the debt or demand be secured by any other lien than that of a judgment or decree, he shall file the original or a certified copy of the writing by which such lien is evidenced.
Any transcript of a judgment or decree of a court or justice of this State, introduced in evidence in any court or before such commissioner, shall prima facie be presumed unpaid unless such judgment or decree appear to have been rendered more than ten years prior to the time of such by proof.(1915, c. 74, §1; Code 1923, c. 129, §11; 1929, c. 40.)
Revisers’ Note.—Near the beginning of the section, the words “other than in a suit to enforce a lien on real estate under the seventh section of chapter one hundred and thirty-nine of the code of e West Virginia, or in any proceedings before a commissioner of accounts of any county, under the thirteenth section of chapter eighty-seven of said n code,” are. omitted. No reason is perceived why the proof of debts by affidavit as provided in this n section should not be proper in all cases pending y before a commissioner. However, where the debt s or demand is evidenced by a note, bond, or other written evidence of indebtedness, which may easily be presented before the commissioner by attorney or otherwise without the necessity of personal presence of the creditor, it is deemed proper to require the affidavit to be supplemented by such additional proof. See Armstrong, Crislip, Day & Co. v. Painter, 75 W. Va. 393. The same reasoning applies to debts evidenced by judgment or decree. Furthermore, if the debt is secured by a lien, the commissioner should have before him authentic evidence of the lien for the purpose of fixing its validity or priority. In view of the foregoing considerations, the last sentence of the first paragraph is added. After “which” in parentheses, the words “competency the” are added to improve the grammar. The words near the middle of the section, “or the validity of any lien by which it is secured” and “or the validity of such lien, as the case may be,” are new.
Committee’s Note.—The words “the original or” near the end of the first paragraph are new. The second paragraph includes the last sentence of Acts 1929, c. 40.
§7. Adjournment of Hearing; Notice of Completion of Report; Exceptions.—A commissioner in chancery may adjourn his proceedings from time to time after the day to which notice was given, without any new notice, until his report is completed; and when it is completed, he shall give notice of the fact to all attorneys who appear of record in the cause; and there after, unless otherwise ordered by the court or agreed by the parties, he shall retain the report and the evidence ten days for the examination of parties interested. Such notice may be given either verbally or in writing, and may be given by depositing the same in due course of mail, properly addressed; and the commissioner shall certify in his report the time and manner of giving such notice. Any party may inspect the report and evidence and file exceptions thereto before such commissioner, or at the term of the court to which it is returned, or, by leave of the court, after such term. In an exception it shall be sufficient to state the item or part of the report to which objection is made, but the court may, if good cause therefor appear, require the exception to be made more specific, or the grounds therefor to be stated therein, and may overrule such exception if the requirement be not complied with.(Code 1849, c. 175, §7; Code 1860, c. 175, §8; Code 1868, c. 129, §7; 1881, c. 34, §9; 1882, c. 57, §7; 1895, c. 8, §7; 1897, c. 43, §7; Code 1923, c. 129, §7.)
Revisers’ Note.—Near the beginning of the second sentence, after “and,” the words “in the case of an attorney not a resident of the county wherein the cause is pending, the notice as to him,” are omitted. The effect of this change in the language is to permit mailing of the notice to all attorneys of record, instead of merely those residing out of the county. The words “the commissioner, in all cases, shall return with his report all the evidence taken upon the execution of the reference, and the exceptions, Procedure on Orders of Reference. 56-7-10 if any, taken to his report, and shall submit such remarks upon exceptions as he may deem pertinent,” which formerly appeared after “thereto” in the third sentence, are transferred to the beginning of the following section.
§8. Contents of Commissioner’s Report.—The commissioner, or any other person executing an order of reference, in all cases, shall return with his report all the evidence taken upon the execution of the reference, and the exceptions, if any, taken to his report, and shall submit such remarks upon exceptions as he may deem pertinent; and he shall also return with his report the decrees, orders and notices under which he acted, He shall not copy in his account or report any papers; and, if there has been a previous account or report, he shall not copy it into his report except so far as may be necessary to make such report a complete account and report in accordance with the decree of reference entered in the cause. Everything improperly copied into a commissioner’s account shall be expunged at his cost on the application of either party; and if on account of his negligence or misconduct a report be recommitted, he shall bear the cost occasioned thereby.(Code 1849, c. 175, §8; Code 1860, c. 175, §9; Code 1868, c. 129, §8; 1881, c. 34, §10; 1882, c. 57, §8; 1895, c. 8, §8; Code 1923, c. 129, §8.)
Revisers’ Note.—The beginning of this section, with the addition of the new words “or any other person executing an order of reference,” is transferred from §7, c. 129, Code 1923. See revisers’ note to the preceding section. The last sentence of §8, c. 129, Code 1923, is made §5 of this article.
§9. When Cause May be Heard on Report.—A cause may be heard upon a commissioner’s report at any time after it is returned, and the court may, for good cause shown by any party interested, hear a cause on a commissioner’s report returned after the commencement of the term of court at which such hearing is desired to be had, but the court in this latter case may require the party desiring the hearing to give reasonable notice to the opposite party or to his attorney.(Code 1849, c. 175, §9; Code 1860, c. 175, §10; Code 1868, c. 129, §9; 1872-3, c. 138, §6; 1881, c. 34, §11; 1882, c. 57, §9; Code 1923, c. 129, §9.)
§10. Taking Accounts in Actions at Law.—At law, in any case in which it may be deemed necessary, the court may direct any such commissioner or other competent person, either before or at the time of trial, to take and state an account between the parties, which account, when thus stated, shall be deemed prima facie correct, and may be given in evidence to the court or jury trying the case; and the commissioner or other person shall be allowed for such services the same fees that would be allowed a commissioner for similar services in the execution of an order of reference in chancery, to be taxed in the bill of costs.(1872-3, c. 138, §5; 1882, c. 57, §10; Code 1923, c. 129, §10.)
Revisers’ Note.—Near the end of the section, the words “in the execution of an order of reference in chancery” are new. They are added to make plain what seems to have been the rather obscurely expressed original meaning of the statute.
Article 8. Abatement, Revival, Discontinuance, Reinstatement of Suits; Substitution.
§1. Death; Conviction; Insanity; Termination of Powers of Personal Representative, Committee or Guardian.—Where a party dies, or becomes convict of felony, or insane, or the powers of a party who is a personal representative, committee or guardian cease, if such fact occur after verdict, judgment may be entered as if it had not occurred.(Code 1849, c. 173, §1; Code 1860, c. 173, §1; Code 1868, c. 127, §1; Code 1923, c. 127, §1.)
Revisers’ Note.—The words “or guardian” are added after “committee,” in order to put guardians in the same class with personal representatives and committees.
§2. Death of Joint Party; Revival of Pending Suit or Action.—Where such fact occurs in any stage of a cause, whether it be in a court of original or appellate jurisdiction, if it occur as to any of several plaintiffs or defendants, the suit or action may proceed for or against the others, if the cause of suit or action survive to or against them. If a plaintiff or defendant die pending any suit or action, whether the cause of action arising out of contract.(Code 1849, c. 173, §2; Code 1860, c. 173, §2; Code 1868, c. 127, §2; Code 1923, c. 127, §2.)
Revisers’ Note.—Wherever the word “suit” or the word “action” occurs in §2, c. 127, Code 1923, the words “suit or action” are substituted therefor. Near the end of the second sentence, the words “or decree” are added after “judgment.” These changes are made, in accord with §6165, Code Va. 1919, to insure that the section shall apply to both law and equity.
§3. Marriage of Female Party.—The marriage of a female plaintiff or defendant shall not cause a suit or action to abate, but, upon affidavit or other proof of the fact, the suit or action shall proceed in the new name, but if the marriage be not suggested before judgment, the judgment shall be as valid, and may be enforced in like manner, as if no such marriage had taken place.
Revisers’ Note.—This section is new. It is adopted literally from §6166, Code Va. 1919. So far as it provides that marriage shall not abate the action, it is merely declaratory of the law as already interpreted in this State. See Stevens v. Friedman, 58 W. Va. 78.
§4. Cases on Review.—If, in any case of appeal, writ of error, or supersedeas, which is now or may hereafter be pending, there be at any time in an appellate court suggested, or relied on in abatement, the death of a party, or any other fact which, if it had occurred after verdict in an action, would not have prevented a judgment being entered, as if it had not occurred, the appellate court may, in its discretion, enter judgment or decree in such case as if such death or such fact had not occurred.(Code 1860, c. 173, §3; Code 1868, c. 127, §3; Code 1923, c. 127, §3.)
Revisers’ Note.—Near the end of the section, the words “such death or” are added before “such fact” to make more explicit the evident meaning of the statute.
§5. Scire Facias or Motion for Revival; Continuance; Pleadings.—In any stage of any case, a scire facias may be sued out for or against the committee of any party who is insane or a convict; or for or against a party before insane, a convict or an infant, the powers of whose committee or guardian have ceased; or for or against the personal representative of the decedent who, or whose committee, guardian or personal representative, was a party; or for or against the succeeding or substituted committee or guardian of a convict, insane person or infant whose committee or guardian was a party and has died or been removed; or for or against the heirs or devisees of a decedent who was a party; or for the assignee or beneficiary party; to show cause why the suit or action should not proceed in the name of him or them. Or where the party dying, or whose powers cease, or such insane person or convict, is plaintiff or appellant, the person or persons for whom such scire facias might be sued out may, without notice or scire facias, move that the suit proceed in his or their name. Likewise, the person or persons against whom a scire facias might be sued out by the plaintiff may also, without notice or scire facias, move that the suit or action proceed in his or their name. If the proceeding be by scire facias, after service of the scire facias, or if the proceeding be by motion, then on such motion, if no sufficient cause be shown against it, an order shall be entered that the suit or action proceed according to such scire facias or motion. Any such new party, except in an appellate court, may have a continuance of the case at the term at which such order is entered; and the court may allow him to plead anew or amend the pleadings as far as it deems reasonable; but in other respects the case shall proceed to final judgment or decree for or against him, in like manner as if the case had been pending for or against him before such scire facias or motion.(Code 1849, c. 173, §3; Code 1860, c. 173, §4; Code 1868, c. 127, §4; Code 1923, c. 127, §4.)
Revisers’ Note.—In the first sentence, after the words “a party before insane,” are added the words “a convict or an infant.” After the words “the powers of whose committee,” are added “or guardian.” The purpose of these changes is to put infants and convicts in a class with insane persons with reference to reviving, after the disability has ceased to exist, a suit brought by or against a guardian or committee. Between “whose” and “personal representative,” the words “committee, guardian or” are added. This change is in accord with Straight v. Ice, 56 W. Va. 60, holding: “A suit in equity in the name of the committee of an insane person to recover a debt may be revived in the name of the administrator of the insane person upon his death.” The word “guardian” is added to take care of infants in the analogous case where the infant dies pending a suit by or against his guardian. The provision for revival for or against a succeeding or substituted committee or guardian is new. The words “or action,” wherever appearing after “suit,” are added to insure that the statute shall apply in both law and equity cases. The third sentence, except the word “likewise” at the beginning, and with the addition of the words “or action,” is taken literally from §6168, Code Va. 1919. The object is to permit parties who desire to revive in the status of defendants to do so by motion, which had already been permitted to plaintiffs. See the revisers’ note to the section of the Virginia Code above cited. Adding this sentence necessitated substituting, in the fourth sentence, for “in the former case” and “in the latter case,” respectively, “If the proceeding be by scire facias” and “if the proceeding be by motion, then”; but the meaning of the sentence is not changed.
§6. Time for Issuance of Scire Facias; Entering Order at Rules.—The clerk of the court in which the case is may issue such scire facias at any time, and an order may be entered at rules for the case to proceed in the name of the proper party, although the case be on the court docket.(Code 1849, c. 173, §4; Code 1860, c. 173, §5; Code 1868, c. 127, §5; Code 1923, c. 127, §5.)
§7. Proceedings After Revival Against Defendant Whose Powers Cease.—Where the party whose powers cease is defendant, the plaintiff may continue his suit against him to final judgment or decree; but he shall not at law proceed in the same action against such defendant and his successor, nor shall he in equity proceed against both upon his previous bill, unless an order that the suit proceed against the former party be entered at the first term after service of a scire facias for or against such successor, or at the same term at which a motion to revive is made under the provisions of section five of this article in lieu of a scire facias.(Code 1849, c. 173, §5; Code 1860, c. 173, §6; Code 1868, c. 127, §6; Code 1923, c. 127, §6.)
Revisers’ Note.—The concluding part of this section coming after the last comma is new, and is added in accord with the changes made in §5 of this article permitting defendant parties to revive by motion as well as by scire facias.
§8. When Suit Discontinued Unless Revived.—If the committee, personal representative, heirs, or devisees of the plaintiff or appellant who was a party, or of the decedent whose committee, guardian, or personal representative was plaintiff or appellant, or other person now or hereafter entitled to be substituted under the provisions of this article for a party plaintiff or appellant, shall not make such motion or apply for such scire facias at or before the second term of the court next after that at which there may have been a suggestion on the record of the fact making such scire facias or motion proper, the suit of such plaintiff or appellant shall be discontinued, unless good cause be shown to the contrary.(Code 1849, c. 173, §6; Code 1860, c. 173, §7; Code 1868, c. 127, §7; Code 1923, c. 127, §7.)
Revisers’ Note.—The addition of the words “committee, guardian, or,” after “the decedent whose,” and of the words “or other person now or hereafter entitled to be substituted under the provisions of this article for a party plaintiff or appellant,” is made in order to conform to the changes made in §5 of this article allowing additional instances of revival.
§9. Discontinuance for Failure to Prosecute.—Any court in which is pending any case wherein for more than two years there has been no order or proceeding but to continue it, or wherein the plaintiff is delinquent in the payment of accrued court costs, may, in its discretion, order such case to be struck from its docket; and it shall thereby be discontinued. A court making such order may direct it to be published in such newspaper as it may name.(Code 1849, c. 173, §7; Code 1860, c. 173, §8; Code 1868, c. 127, §8; 1921, c. 66, §8; Code 1923, c. 127, §8.)
§10. Death of One of Numerous Parties in Equity.—When in any suit in equity the number of parties exceeds thirty, and any one of such parties jointly interested with others in any question arising therein shall die, the court may nevertheless proceed, if in its opinion all classes of interest in the case are represented and the interest of no one will be prejudiced by the trial of the cause, to render a decree in such suit as if such person were alive, decreeing to the heirs at law, distributees, or representatives of such person, as the case may require, such interest as such person would have been entitled to had such person been alive at the date of the decree. The provisions of section twenty-six, article three of this chapter shall apply to decrees entered under this section.(Code 1860, c. 173, §§9, 10; Code 1868, c. 127, §§9, 10; Code 1923, c. 127, §§9, 10.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is a composite of §§9 and 10, c. 127, Code 1923. Said §10, with the formal changes necessary in transferring it, is the last sentence of this section.
§11. Death of Trustee and Appointment of Substitute in Pending Suit.—In a suit in equity in which it appears that a trustee has died, although the heirs of such trustee be not parties to the suit, yet if his personal representative and the other persons interested be parties, the court may appoint another trustee in the place of him who has died, to act either alone or in conjunction with any surviving trustee, as the case may require.(Code 1849, c. 178, §5; Code 1860, c. 178, §5; Code 1868, c. 132, §5; 1882, c. 142, §5; Code 1923, c. 132, §5.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section is composed of the beginning portion of §5, c. 132, Code 1923. It is placed here because its effect is analogous to the ordinary process of revival. Other portions of said §5 are covered in art. 14, c. 44.
§12. Reinstatement of Case.—Any court may, on motion, reinstate on the trial docket of the court any case dismissed, and set aside any nonsuit that may be entered by reason of the nonappearance of the plaintiff, within three terms after the order of dismissal shall have been made, or order of nonsuit entered; but any such order of reinstatement shall not be entered until the accrued costs in such case shall have been paid.(1868, c. 132, §1; Code 1868, c. 127, §11; 1872-3, c. 137, §11; 1882, c. 51, §11; 1921, c. 66, §11; Code 1923, c. 127, §11.)
Revisers’ Note.—Near the middle of the section, before “have been made,” “shall” is substituted for “may” to express more clearly the obvious meaning of the statute.
§13. Further Proceedings After Reinstatement of Case.—All causes in which orders of dismissal have been made, or orders of nonsuit entered, which orders have been set aside and causes reinstated, shall remain upon the docket and be proceeded with in the same manner as if the order had never been made. But no such cause shall be brought to trial, or proceeded in, until the defendant therein shall have had at least twenty days’ personal notice in writing, or, if he be a nonresident, by the publication of such notice once in each week for three successive weeks in some newspaper designated by the court, that such cause has been reinstated on the docket.(1868, c. 132, §2; Code 1868, c. 127, §12; 1882, c. 51, §12; Code 1923, c. 127, §12.)
Revisers’ Note.—In the second sentence, “thirty days” is changed to “twenty days” and “four successive weeks” to “three successive weeks.”
Article 9. Removal of Causes.
§1. Removal of Causes in General; Notice; Motion.—A circuit court, or any court of limited jurisdiction established pursuant to the provisions of section nineteen, article eight of the Constitution of this State, wherein an action, suit, motion or other civil proceeding is pending, or the judge thereof in vacation, may, on the motion of any party, after ten days’ notice to the adverse party or his attorney, and for good cause shown, order such action, suit, motion or other civil proceeding to be removed, if pending in a circuit court, to any other circuit court, and if pending in any court of limited jurisdiction hereinbefore mentioned, to the circuit court of that county.(Code 1849, c. 174, §3; Code 1860, c. 174, §3; Code 1868, c. 128, §1; Code 1923, c. 128, §1.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section embraces the subject matter of the first two sentences of §1, c. 128, Code 1923, rearranged, and with the following changes: (a) The provisions relating to courts of limited jurisdiction are new, being intended to embrace common pleas and other intermediate courts, (b) The section is specifically extended to cover actions, motions and other civil proceedings as well as suits, following in this respect, except as to the word “action,” §6175, Code Va. 1919. (c) “Ten days’ notice” is required instead of the “reasonable” notice of our former statute and the “twenty days’ notice” of the Virginia section referred to. (d) Notice may be given to the attorney of the adverse party, (c) Provision is made for the removal of a cause from a court of limited jurisdiction to the circuit court of that county.
§2. Removal Where it is Improper for Judge to Hear Case.—If the judge of any circuit or other court mentioned in the next preceding section, wherein an action, suit, motion or other civil proceeding is pending, is so situated as to render it improper, in his opinion, for him to decide such case or preside at the trial thereof, such court or the judge thereof in vacation may, without motion or notice, order the case to be removed to any court to which it might be removed, on motion and notice, under the preceding section.(Code 1849, c. 174, §3; Code 1860, c. 174, §3; Code 1868, c. 128, §1; Code 1923, c. 128, §1.)
Revisers’ Note.—This section embraces the subject matter of the last sentence of §1, c. 128, Code 1923, rearranged to conform to the next preceding section, and following the arrangement, of §6176, Code Va. 1919.
§3. Transfer of Papers; Proceedings After Removal; Costs.—When any case is ordered to be removed under this article, the clerk of the court, from which, shall transmit to the clerk of the court, to which, it is removed, the original papers therein, with copies of all rules and orders made, and a statement of the costs in curred by each party therein; whereupon, the case shall be proceeded in, heard and determined by the court to which it is removed, as if it had been brought, and the previous proceedings had, in such court. The costs attending such removal shall be charged as may be thought just by the court from which, or, if it make no order on the subject, by the court to which, the case is removed.(Code 1849, c. 174, §5; Code 1860, c. 174, §4; Code 1868, c. 128, §2; Code 1923, c. 128, §2.)
Article 10. Miscellaneous Provisions Relating to Procedure.
Committee’s Note.—Sections 4 and 5 of this article, as reported by the revisers, are omitted as covered in the committee’s redraft of §34, art. 1, c. 69, and the succeeding sections of the article are renumbered.
§1. Interpleader; Procedure Thereon.—A defendant in an action brought against him for the recovery of money which he does not wish to defend, but which money is claimed by some third person, or for the recovery of the possession of personal property to which he makes no Claim, but which is claimed by a third person, may file his affidavit stating the facts in relation thereto, and that he does not collude with such third person but is ready to pay the, money claimed, or deliver the property, to the owner thereof, as the court may direct, and the court may thereupon make an order requiring such third person to appear and state the nature of his claim, and maintain or relinquish the same, and may in the meantime stay the proceedings in such action. If such third person, on being served with a copy of such order, shall not appear, the court may, on proof of the plaintiff’s right, render judgment for him, and declare such third person to be forever barred of any claim in respect of the subject matter, either against the plaintiff or the original defendant, or his personal representative. If such third person, on being so served, shall appear, the court shall allow him to make himself defendant in the action and, either in such action or otherwise, cause such issue or issues to be tried as it may prescribe, and may direct which party shall be considered the plaintiff in the issues; and shall give judgment upon the verdict rendered or, if a jury be waived by the parties interested, shall determine their claims in a summary way. The court may also make such order for the disposition of the money or property which is the subject matter of the action, pending the same, as to it may seem proper.(Code 1849, c. 152, §1; Code 1860, c. 152, §1; Code 1868, c. 107, §1; 1882, c. 72, §1; Code 1923, c. 107, §1.)
§2. Who May Execute Bonds Required in Suits.—A bond for obtaining any writ or order, in term or vacation, may be executed by any person with sufficient surety, though neither of the obligors be a party to the ease.(Code 1849, c. 183, §3; Code 1860, c. 183, §3; Code 1868, c. 136, §2; 1882, c. 124, §2; Code 1923, c. 136, §2.)
Revisers’ Note.—Following §6376, Code Va. 1919, “time” is omitted after “term,” and “one” before “person.” The words “though neither of the obligors be a party to the case,” except the word “obligors,” are adopted from said §6375, and are substituted for “though it be in a case no party to which is an obligor.” These changes simplify the language without changing the meaning.
§3. Recovery of Damages for Detention of Property After Verdict.—When a judgment for specific personal property is affirmed by an appellate court, or an injunction to such judgment is dissolved, the person who is entitled to execution of such judgment, or who would be entitled if execution had not been had, may, on motion to the court from which such execution has issued, or might issue, after twenty days’ notice to the defendant or his personal repre sentative, have a jury impaneled to ascertain the damages sustained by reason of the detention of such property subsequent to such judgment; or if it was on a verdict, subsequent to such verdict; and judgment shall be rendered for the damages so ascertained, if any.(Code 1860, c. 183, §6; Code 1868, c. 136, §3; 1882, c. 124, §3; Code 1923, c. 136, §3.)
Revisers’ Note.—The period of notice is reduced from four weeks to twenty days, thus corresponding to the time period provided for obtaining judgment by motion on notice. See revisers’ note to §6377, Code Va. 1919.
§4. Compromise of Actions or Suits on Behalf of Infants or Insane Persons.—In any action or suit wherein an infant or insane person is a party, the court in which the same is pending, or the judge thereof in vacation, shall have the power to approve and confirm a compromise of the matters in controversy on behalf of such infant or insane person, if such compromise shall be deemed to be to the best interest of the infant or insane person. Such approval or confirmation shall never be granted except upon written application therefor by the guardian, committee, curator, or next friend of the infant or insane person, setting forth under oath all the facts of the case and the reasons why such compromise is deemed to be for the best interest of the infant or insane person. And the court or judge, before approving such compromise, shall, in order to determine whether to approve or disapprove the compromise, hear the testimony of witnesses relating to the subject matter of the compromise, and cause said testimony to be reduced to writing and filed with the papers in the case. The court or judge, upon approving and confirming such compromise, shall enter judgment or decree accordingly. Such judgment or decree shall bind the respective parties thereto, including such infant or insane person, with like force and effect, and shall be subject to review, modification or reversal to the same extent only, as if it were a consent judgment or decree, entered under similar circumstances, in a case in which all the parties were adults and sane.
Revisers’ Note.—This section is new. The first sentence, with some slight changes, is taken from §5332, Code Va. 1919, and the second largely from Bagby’s Ann. Code of Md., art. 75, §56.
Committee’s Note.—For other provisions of this Code giving authority to fiduciaries to compromise and settle claims, see §7, art. 5, c. 44, §14, art. 10, c. 44, and §7, art. 7, c. 55.
§5. Partition of Chattels.—When an equal division of goods or chattels cannot be made in kind among those entitled, a court of equity may direct the sale of the same and the distribution of the proceeds according to the rights of the parties.(Code 1849, c. 124, §6; 1860, c. 124, §6; Code 1868, c. 79, §6; Code 1923, c. 79, §6.)
§6. Affidavits by Corporations and Agents.—An affidavit by or for a corporation may be made by its president, vice president, general manager, cashier, treasurer, or a director, with out any special authorization therefor, or by any person authorized by a majority of its stock holders or directors to make the same; and when an affidavit is made by any person other than the principal authorized by law to make it, such person shall be deemed to have been the agent of the person so authorized until the contrary is made to appear.
Committee’s Note.—This section is new. It is taken verbatim from §276 Code Va. 1919. See the revisers’ note to said §276.