Wythepedia: The George Wythe Encyclopedia - User contributions [en]

Tomlinson v. Dillard

2018-05-09T16:43:08Z

Drbordley: /* The Court's Decision */

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Tomlinson v. Dillard''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:CallsReports1854V3TomlinsonvDillard.pdf ‎|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:CallsReports1854V3TomlinsonvDillard.pdf ‎|''Tomlinson v. Dillard'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia''], by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854.]]
In [[Media:CallsReports1854V3TomlinsonvDillard.pdf ‎|''Tomlinson v. Dillard'']], 7 Va. (3 Call) 93 (1801),<ref>Daniel Call, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia,''3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. (Richmond: A. Morris, 1854), 3:93.</ref> the court determined whether the mother of a deceased infant was entitled to any part of the estate the son inherited from his father.
__NOTOC__
==Background==
On February 1, 1791, Benjamin Tomlinson died leaving a will where he gave his pregnant wife, Nancy Edloe Tomlinson, his property and devised to his future child the rest of his estate. After Benjamin’s death, Nancy birthed a son named Benjamin Edloe Tomlinson. In 1798, Nancy remarried George Dillard. On September 3 of the same year, Benjamin Edloe Tomlinson died at just 18 months. Not long after, Nancy also died. Benjamin Tomlinson’s siblings and their descendants brought this case against George Dillard to recover Benjamin’s land.
===The Court's Decision===
Chancellor Wythe was of the opinion that the mother inherited the slaves and personal estate of the infant at his death. Consequently, Wythe determined that that George Dillard, through marriage, was also entitled to the estate. Wythe dismissed the case with court costs. Benjamin Tomlinson's siblings appealed the decision and the Court of Appeals reversed.

==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Tomlinson v. Dillard

2018-05-09T16:42:08Z

Drbordley:

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Tomlinson v. Dillard''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:CallsReports1854V3TomlinsonvDillard.pdf ‎|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:CallsReports1854V3TomlinsonvDillard.pdf ‎|''Tomlinson v. Dillard'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia''], by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854.]]
In [[Media:CallsReports1854V3TomlinsonvDillard.pdf ‎|''Tomlinson v. Dillard'']], 7 Va. (3 Call) 93 (1801),<ref>Daniel Call, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia,''3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. (Richmond: A. Morris, 1854), 3:93.</ref> the court determined whether the mother of a deceased infant was entitled to any part of the estate the son inherited from his father.
__NOTOC__
==Background==
On February 1, 1791, Benjamin Tomlinson died leaving a will where he gave his pregnant wife, Nancy Edloe Tomlinson, his property and devised to his future child the rest of his estate. After Benjamin’s death, Nancy birthed a son named Benjamin Edloe Tomlinson. In 1798, Nancy remarried George Dillard. On September 3 of the same year, Benjamin Edloe Tomlinson died at just 18 months. Not long after, Nancy also died. Benjamin Tomlinson’s siblings and their descendants brought this case against George Dillard to recover Benjamin’s land.
===The Court's Decision===
Chancellor Wythe, was of the opinion that the mother succeeded the slaves and personal estate of the infant, at his death. Consequently, Wythe determined that that George Dillard through marriage, was also entitled to the estate. Wythe dismissed the case with court costs. Benjamin Tomlinson's siblings appealed the decision and the Court of Appeals reversed.
==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Taylor's Admin. v. Nicolson

2018-05-09T16:30:46Z

Drbordley:

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Taylor's Admin v. Nicolson''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V1Taylor'sAdminvNicolson.pdf ‎|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V1Taylor'sAdminvNicolson.pdf ‎|''Taylor's Admin v. Nicolson'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District''], by William Hening and William Munford. Flatbush: I. Riley, 1809.]]
[[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V1Taylor'sAdminvNicolson.pdf ‎|''Taylor's Admin. v. Nicolson'']], 11 Va. (1 Hen. & M.) 66 (1806),<ref>William Hening and William Munford, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District,''(Flatbush, N.Y.: I. Riley, 1809), 1:66.</ref> was a case where the court determined whether there were legal grounds to set aside an arbitration award.
__NOTOC__
==Background==
Taylor and Nicolson entered a partnership to lease “Manchester Mills”. Under their Articles of Co-partnership, if one partner died prior to the lease’s expiration, the surviving partner could purchase the remainder of the lease for a price determined through arbitration. Taylor died before the lease expired and Nicolson sought to buy Taylor’s portion of the lease. Following the terms of the agreement, Taylor’s Administrator and Nicolson chose three arbitrators to determine the buying price. The arbitrators found Taylor’s portion of the lease to be worth £595. However, the arbitrators based the award on the condition that George Mayo, the lessor, waive any future liability on Taylor's estate. Although George agreed to these terms, Taylor’s Administrator sued Nicolson arguing that the award should be set aside because the arbitrators departed from the terms of the arbitration, the rates used to determine the award were usurious, and the award lacked mutuality.
===The Court's Decision===
Chancellor Wythe dismissed the request to set aside the award. Wythe then decreed that Taylor's Estate should receive the sum of the award, with interest after deducting Nicolson's costs in defending the suit. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

File:Henings&MunfordsReports1809V2TurpinvThomas.pdf

2018-05-08T19:55:35Z

Drbordley: "Turpin v. Thomas" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District'',...

"Turpin v. Thomas" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District'', by William Hening and William Munford. Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809. [[Category:Cases]]

Wythe's Judicial Career

2018-05-08T19:19:24Z

Drbordley: /* Cases from Virginia Reports */

[[File:Postcard10_Detail.jpg|thumb|right|300px|<p>Detail from first day cover postcard for June 20, 1985, with cachet of [[George Wythe]].]]
Despite being one of the more obscure Founding Fathers, [[George Wythe]] played an important role in the early history of the United States. [http://www.wm.edu William & Mary's] -- and the United States' -- [[Wythe the Teacher|first law professor]], he was a man of great integrity who greatly influenced some of the fledgling country's most important figures with jurisprudential ideas that were often ahead of their time. Why do Americans not know more about this teacher, judge, delegate to the Second Continental Congress, and signer of the [[Declaration of Independence]]? One reason may be a lack of documentation. Thomas Jefferson said he had often seen Wythe toss the documents he created while working on a case into the fire upon the case's conclusion.<ref>Robert B. Kirtland, ''[[George Wythe: Lawyer, Revolutionary, Judge]]'' (New York: Garland Publishing, 1986), 5-6.</ref> The notes Wythe made as William & Mary's [[Professor of Law and Police]] scattered to places unknown long ago.<ref>For more information on the fate of Wythe's personal papers, see the Wythepedia article [[Wythe's Lost Papers]].</ref>

In 1778, Wythe was appointed to the newly created High Court of Chancery.<ref>Beverly Tucker describes the choice of Wythe as a judge, in ''The Principles of Pleading'' (Boston: Charles C. Little & James Brown, 1846), 56:<blockquote>...the people were not wholly insensible of the want of a Court of somewhat different character; and to supply that want was one of the objects, to which the framers of the new Constitution directed their attention. To do this, they established three Courts, for which sixteen Judges learned in the law were wanting. The difficulty was to find the men fit to fill these important posts. ''Integrity'' and ''talent'' were abundant, but a ''learned'' lawyer was indeed a ''rara avis.'' What motive had the lawyers had to acquire learning? With the exception of some few who had studied the profession abroad, and had not been long enough in Virginia to lose the memory of what they knew, in the loose practice prevailing here, there was but one man in the State who had any claims to the character. I speak of the venerable Chancellor Wythe, a man who differed from his contemporaries in this, because in his ordinary motives and modes of action he differed altogether from other men. Without ambition, without avarice, taking no pleasure in society, he was by nature and habit addicted to solitude, and his active mind found its only enjoyment in profound research. The languages of antiquity, the exact sciences, and the law, were the three studies which alone could be pursued with a reasonable hope of arriving at that certainty which his upright and truth-loving mind contemplated as the only object worthy of his labors. To these he devoted himself, and he became a profound lawyer for the same reason that he was a profound Greek scholar, astronomer and mathematician.</blockquote></ref> As a member of the Chancery Court, Wythe also heard appellate cases. An Act of the Assembly in 1779 required all three of the initial Chancery Court judges to serve ''ex officio'' on the Court of Appeals with judges from the Court of Admiralty and the General Court.<ref>Thomas Alonzo Dill, ''George Wythe: Teacher of Liberty'' (Williamsburg, Va.: Virginia Independence Bicentennial Commission, 1979), 40.</ref> When the Assembly reorganized the courts in 1788 and created a permanent Court of Appeals, Wythe remained as the sole chancellor with his decisions subject to review by the Court of Appeals.<ref>William Brockenbrough, [https://books.google.com/books?id=oTETAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Virginia Cases: Or, Decisions of the General Court of Virginia,''] Vol. 2 (Richmond, VA: Peter Cottom, 1826), xiii.</ref>

In 1780, Wythe — along with [[wikipedia:William Paca|William Paca]] of Maryland and [[wikipedia:Titus Hosmer|Titus Hosmer]] of Connecticut — was [[Samuel Huntington to Wythe et al., 2 February 1780|elected one of three judges]] to serve on the [[wikipedia:Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture|Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture]], a newly-established federal appeals court (pre-dating the U.S. Supreme Court by nearly a decade) to hear cases from all Courts of Admiralty. [[Wythe to Samuel Huntington, 21 February 1780|Wythe declined the appointment]], and [[wikipedia:Cyrus Griffin|Cyrus Griffin]] was chosen in his place.<ref>Hampton L. Carson, [https://books.google.com/books?id=brAOp7K8ukMC&pg=PA55 ''The Supreme Court of the United States: Its History''] (Philadelphia: A.R. Keller, 1892), 1:55-56.</ref>

Wythe's career as a judge may be the best-documented aspect of his life. We have multiple sources for Wythe's decisions, including decisions published by Wythe himself and decisions published in the ''Virginia Reports''. The latter include landmark Court of Appeals cases such as ''Commonwealth v. Caton''.

==Cases published by Wythe==
Wythe compiled a volume of some of his Chancery Court cases, now known as ''[[Wythe's Reports]]''.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]]'' (Richmond: Printed by Thomas Nicolson, 1795).</ref> Several decades after Wythe died, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Blake_Minor Benjamin Blake Minor] edited a second edition of the ''Reports'' that added decisions Wythe published separately.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery with Remarks upon Decrees by the Court of Appeals, Reversing Some of Those Decisions|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]],'' 2nd ed., ed. B.B. Minor (Richmond: J.W. Randolph, 1852).</ref>

The ''Reports'' contain cases that Wythe heard as Virginia's High Chancellor, the judge who sat on the commonwealth's High Court of Chancery, a court of equity. In the Anglo-American legal system, equity developed as an alternative set of remedies to the common law system; equity was supposed to provide a solution when the common law outcome would not provide proper justice. In the early days of the United States, many states had separate courts to hear equity cases. Equity cases usually involved property, contract, and inheritance disputes, so those are the cases the reader will find in ''Wythe's Reports''. Wythepedia has created pages for each of the decisions in the ''Reports'' summarizing the case and its background and explaining references to sources Wythe cited. We can think of ''Wythe's Reports'' as his version of a casebook, the textbooks that modern law students are familiar with. Wythe excerpts and summarizes the court's decisions, sometimes including subsequent appeals to other courts, then comments on them. Wythe hopes that by reading his commentaries on the courts' decisions, future lawyers and students of law will reach a better understanding of the law as it was in Virginia and how he thought it ''should'' be.

Wythe's ''Reports'' demands a lot from its readers. Wythe frequently cited or alluded to Ancient Greek and Latin works (often in their original language, with no English translation), as well as more recent classic authors such as Cervantes, Dante, and Shakespeare. He frequently used shorthand references and terms of art that lawyers of his era would understand, but which may baffle 21st-century readers. Wythe frequently left out information such as how the case arrived before him or facts that Wythe found irrelevant to the point he was trying to make. Often, if a Wythe decision was appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, that higher court's opinion would be a better source for the facts of the case.

Properly understanding Wythe's decisions also means knowing their historical context. Many of the cases Wythe decided were influenced by events that were familiar to educated people in his day, but are esoteric history to modern Americans. Wythe also believed that Roman law principles were sometimes superior to English legal precedent, and cautioned against blindly following England's caselaw. Wythe believed, as did many of his contemporaries, that as a new country, the United States might wish to follow European-style civil law principles rather than Anglo common law.<ref>Timothy G. Kearley, "From Rome to the Restatement", ''Law Library Journal'' 108(1) (Winter 2016): 60.</ref>

Another important piece of subtext lurking within ''Wythe's Reports'' is its author's long rivalry with [[Edmund Pendleton]], President of the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Wythe had arguably the most brilliant jurisprudential mind of his generation, and he was rarely defeated when he argued a case. The gregarious Pendleton, however, was a master litigator and one of the few people capable of defeating Wythe in court. As President of the Supreme Court, Pendleton reversed a substantial number of Wythe's decisions.

Wythepedia articles on the cases in ''Wythe's Reports'' summarize the case, and include notes and links to useful articles that can better explain the conflict and reasoning in the case. Wythepedia also includes articles that fill in the background behind a number of these decisions. ''Wythe's Reports'' can be a treatise on Virginia law and equity, a snapshot of life in Virginia during the late 18th century, and a profile of one of this nation's most underappreciated Founders.

<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Ambler v. Wyld]]''
*''[[Aylett v. Aylett]]''
*''[[Bailey v. Teackle]]''
*''[[Beverley v. Rennolds]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Cadwallader v. Mason]]''
*''[[Cary v. Buxton]]''
*''[[Case upon the Statute for Distribution]]''
*''[[Cobs v. Mosby]]''
*''[[Cochran v. Street]]''
*''[[Cole v. Scott]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Lyon]]''
*''[[Dawson v. Winslow]]''
*''[[Devisme v. Martin]]''
*''[[Farley v. Shippen]]''
*''[[Farrar v. Jackson]]''
*''[[Field v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock]]''
*''[[Hamilton & Co. v. Urquhart]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Allen]]''
*''[[Hearne v. Roane]]''
*''[[Hill v. Gregory]]''
*''[[Hinde v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Kelsick]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Kuhn]]''
*''[[Hylton v. Hunter]]''
*''[[Jones v. White]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Donelson]]''
*''[[Maze v. Hamilton]]''
*''[[Nance v. Woodward]]''
*''[[Overstreet v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Overton v. Ross]]''
*''[[Page v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Hoomes]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Lomax]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Roane v. Innis]]''
*''[[Rose v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pines]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Richardson]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Turpin]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Williams v. Jacob]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Rucker]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Woods v. Macrae]]''
*''[[Yates v. Salle]]''
</div>

==Cases from Virginia Reports==
<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Alexander v. Morris]]''
*''[[Allen v. Minor]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Fox]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Gest]]''
*''[[Applebury v. Anthony]]''
*''[[Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas|The Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Chevallie|The Auditor v. Chevallie]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x|The Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x]]''
*''[[Austin's Admin v. Winston's Executrix]]''
*''[[Baird v. Bland]]''
*''[[Barnett & Co. v. Smith & Co.]]''
*''[[Barrett v. Floyd]]''
*''[[Beckwith v. Butler]]''
*''[[Bedford v. Hickman]]''
*''[[Bernard v. Hipkins]]''
*''[[Blane v. Proudfit]]''
*''[[Blane v. Smith]]''
*''[[Blanton v. Brackett]]''
*''[[Blunt v. Gee]]''
*''[[Branch v. Burnley]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Andrews]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Gaines]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Lee's heirs]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Morris]]''
*''[[Brewer v. Hastie & Co.]]''
*''[[Brown v. Brown]]''
*''[[Browne v. Turberville]]''
*''[[Buckner v. Smith]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock|Bullock v. Goodall]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Campbell v. Price]]''
*''[[Carter's Ex'or v. Currie]]''
*''[[Cary v. Macon]]''
*''[[Chandler's Executrix v. Hill]]''
*''[[Chapman's Adm'x v. Turner]]''
*''[[Chapmans v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Cheshire v. Atkinson]]''
*''[[Chichester's Ex'x v. Vass's Adm'r.]]''
*''[[Chisholm v. Starke]]''
*''[[Claiborne v. Henderson]]''
*''[[Clarke v. Conn]]''
*''[[Clay v. Williams]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Beaumarchais]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Bristow]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Colquhouns]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Ronald]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Walker's Exc'r]]''
*''[[Countz v. Geiger]]''
*''[[Coutt's Trustees v. Craig]]''
*''[[Coutts v. Greenhow]]''
*''[[Cowles v. Brown]]''
*''[[Cringan v. Nicolson's Exec'rs]]''
*''[[Croughton v. Duval]]''
*''[[Curry v. Burns]]''
*''[[Dabney v. Green]]''
*''[[Dalby v. Price]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Dorrington]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Harris]]''
*''[[Dangerfield v. Rootes]]''
*''[[Davenport v. Mason]]''
*''[[Day v. Murdoch]]''
*''[[Deanes v. Scriba]]''
*''[[Deneale v. Morgan's Ex'ors]]''
*''[[Dunn v. Bray]]''
*''[[Duval v. Bibb]]''
*''[[Ellzey v. Lane's Executrix]]''
*''[[Engle v. Burns]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Tucker]]''
*''[[Fitzgerald v. Jones]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Foote]]''
*''[[Fleming v. Bolling]]''
*''[[Flemings v. Willis]]''
*''[[Fletcher v. Pollard]]''
*''[[Ford v. Gardner]]''
*''[[Foster v. Crenshaw's Exec'ors]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Franklin v. Wilkinson]]''
*''[[Freelands v. Royall]]''
*''[[Goodwin v. Miller]]''
*''[[Graham v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Granberry v. Granberry]]''
*''[[Grantland v. Wight]]''
*''[[Green v. Price]]''
*''[[Hackett v. Alcock]]''
*''[[Hadfield v. Jameson]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Harvey v. Borden]]''
*''[[Hawkins's Ex'ors v. Minor, Ex'or of Berkeley]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Hudson]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Lightfoot]]''
*''[[Hite's Exec. v. Paul's heirs]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Marquess]]''
*''[[Hook v. Ross]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Smock]]''
*''[[Hopkins v. Blane]]''
*''[[Hord v. Dishman]]''
*''[[Hudgins v. Wrights]]''
*''[[Hunter v. Hall]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Brown]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Buffington]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Jones v. Roberts]]''
*''[[Jones v. Tomlinson]]''
*''[[Jones v. Williams]]''
*''[[Latham v. Latham]]''
*''[[Lawrason v. Davenport]]''
*''[[Lee v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Lewis's Ex'or v. Bacon]]''
*''[[Lindsay v. Howerton]]''
*''[[Lipscomb's Adm. v. Winston]]''
*''[[Lomax v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Long v. Colston]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Ross, Shore & Co.]]''
*''[[Madison v. Vaughan]]''
*''[[Maupin v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Mayo v. Bentley]]''
*''[[M'Call v. Peachy]]''
*''[[M'Connico v. Curzen]]''
*''[[Meredith v. Johns]]''
*''[[Mills v. Bell]]''
*''[[Minnis v. Aylett]]''
*''[[M'Kim v. Fulton]]''
*''[[Moore's Executor v. Aylett's Executor]]''
*''[[Moring v. Lucas]]''
*''[[Morris v. Owen]]''
*''[[Morris v. Ross]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1795)]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1807)]]''
*''[[Mutual Assurance Co. v. Mahon]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Harwood]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Suddarth]]''
*''[[Nice v. Purcell]]''
*''[[Nicholas's Executors v. Tyler]]''
*''[[Norton v. Rose]]''
*''[[Page's Exec. v. Winston's Adm'r]]''
*''[[Payne v. Dudley]]''
*''[[Paynes v. Coles]]''
*''[[Pendleton's Exc'r v. Stewart]]''
*''[[Perkins v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Picket v. Dowdall]]''
*''[[Picket v. Morris]]''
*''[[Pleasants v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Cartwright]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Patterson's Adm.]]''
*''[[Pope v. Towles]]''
*''[[President & Professors & Masters of William & Mary Coll. v. Hodgson|The President and Professors and Masters of William & Mary College v. Hodgson]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1799)]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1804)]]''
*''[[Price v. Crump]]''
*''[[Price v. Strange]]''
*''[[Pryor v. Adams]]''
*''[[Quarrier v. Carter's Rep.]]''
*''[[Quesnel v. Woodlief]]''
*''[[Randolph v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Randolph's Ex'r v. Randolph's Ex'rs]]''
*''[[Richardson v. Baker]]''
*''[[Richardson's Ex'r v. Hunt]]''
*''[[Robert's Widow v. Stanton]]''
*''[[Robertson v. Campbell]]''
*''[[Rose v. Murchie]]''
*''[[Ross v. Colville & Co.]]''
*''[[Rowton v. Rowton]]''
*''[[Sallee v. Yates]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'r v. Osborne's Ex'r]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'rs v. Trents]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Shermer]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1800)]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1801)]]''
*''[[Smallwood v. Mercer]]''
*''[[Smith v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Smith v. Wallace]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Spottswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Stanard v. Brownlow]]''
*''[[Stannard v. Graves]]''
*''[[Stephens v. Cobun]]''
*''[[Stockton v. Cook]]''
*''[[Syme v. Johnston]]''
*''[[Tabb v. Archer]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro's Ex'rs v. Thornton]]''
*''[[Tarpley's Admin. v. Dobyns]]''
*''[[Taylor v. Stone]]''
*''[[Taylor's Admin. v. Nicolson]]''
*''[[Templeman v. Steptoe]]''
*''[[Thornton v. Corbin]]''
*''[[Tinsley v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard/Mackey v. Bell]]''
*''[[Towler v. Buchanans & Co.]]''
*''[[Triplett v. Wilson]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Locket]]''
*''[[Turnpin v. Thomas]]''
*''[[Upshaw v. Upshaw]]''
*''[[Walker v. Walke]]''
*''[[Wallace v. Taliaferro]]''
*''[[Ward v. Webber]]''
*''[[Westfall v. Singleton]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1795)]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1800)]]''
*''[[Wigglesworth v. Steers]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Keeling]]''
*''[[Winston v. Johnson's Exec.]]''
*''[[Wolcott v. Swan]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Barrett & Co.]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Payne]]''
*''[[Worsham v. M'Kenzie]]''
*''[[Wright v. Dawney]]''
*''[[Yancey v. Hopkins]]''
*''[[Yerby v. Yerby]]''
*''[[Young v. Price]]''
*''[[Young v. Skipwith]]''
</div>

==County court cases==

*''[[Warrington v. Jiggitts]]''

==Court of Appeals cases==
*''[[Commonwealth v. Caton]]''

==See also==
*''[[Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery|Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery]]''
*[[George Wythe and Slavery]]
*[[Land Disputes in Western Virginia]]
*[[Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall|The Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall]]
*[[Virginia Hyperinflation and Debt]]
*[[Women's Legal Rights in Wythe's Time]]

==References==
<references />

==Further reading==
*Bryson, W. Hamilton. "The Use of Roman Law in Virginia Courts." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 28 (1984): 135-146.
*Hoffman, Richard J. "Classics in the Courts of the United States, 1790-1800." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 55 (1978): 55-84.
*Holt, Wythe. "[http://www.law.ua.edu/pubs/lrarticles/Volume%2058/Issue%205/Holt.pdf George Wythe: Early Modern Judge.]" In ''Alabama Law Review'' 58, no. 5 (2007): 1009-1039.

==External links==
*[https://scvahistory.org/about/w/george-wythe-1779-1789/ George Wythe, August 30, 1779-March 5, 1789,] Virginia Appellate Court History.

[[Category: Aspects of Wythe's Life]]
[[Category: Cases]]

Westfall v. Singleton

2018-05-08T19:15:27Z

Drbordley: /* The Court's Decision */

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Westfall v. Singleton''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:WashingtonsReports1798V1WestfallvSingleton.pdf|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:WashingtonsReports1798V1WestfallvSingleton.pdf|''Westfall v. Singleton'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Virginia''], by Bushrod Washington. Richmond: T. Nicolson, 1798.]]
[[Media:WashingtonsReports1798V1WestfallvSingleton.pdf|''Westfall v. Singleton'']], 1 Va. (1 Wash.) 227 (1793),<ref>Bushrod Washington, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Virginia,''(Richmond: T. Nicolson, 1798), 1:227. </ref> is a land dispute case.
==Background==
In 1749, lord Fairfax publicly advertised for settlers to live in Northern Neck and promised to grant land rights for those who settled there. However, a man named Vanderpool, who previously settled in Northern Neck, about this time, sold his land to Abel Westfall. Abel possessed the property until 1755, when he died interstate and left two sons—Cornelius and John. In 1770, Lord Fairfax conveyed land including Abel's property to Bryant Martin. The conveyance gave Bryant the disputed land for three lives and was renewable forever, so long as Bryant paid rent. Cornelius, who was living in New Jersey at the time of father's death, took possession of the land in 1773. Cornelius paid rent to Lord Fairfax for some years, though lord Fairfax never officially conveyed the land to him. Regardless, Cornelius passed down the property to his sons, Issac and Zachariah, 1780, who later conveyed the land to Jacob Westfall, the plaintiff of this case. Jacob sued Singleton in the High Court of Chancery to obtain the undisputed property rights of the land. Singleton answered the suit stating that he purchased the land from John Westfall, Abel Westfall's youngest son, and he obtained an official deed for the land from lord Fairfax in 1773.
===The Court's Decision===
Chancellor Wythe dismissed the case stating there was no equity admitted by the answer or established by the evidence. The Court of Appeals reversed the ruling. The Court reasoned that if lord Fairfax was advertising titles, he should have granted titles to those who had already settled on the land. If this was the case, Abel would have undisputed title to the property and that title would be passed down to his eldest son, Cornelius. Thus, since John obtained his title through the elder Westfall, he was the rightful owner of the land.

==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Westfall v. Singleton

2018-05-08T19:13:16Z

Drbordley: Created page with "{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Westfall v. Singleton''}} File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:WashingtonsReports1798V1WestfallvSingleton.pdf|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinio..."

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Westfall v. Singleton''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:WashingtonsReports1798V1WestfallvSingleton.pdf|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:WashingtonsReports1798V1WestfallvSingleton.pdf|''Westfall v. Singleton'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Virginia''], by Bushrod Washington. Richmond: T. Nicolson, 1798.]]
[[Media:WashingtonsReports1798V1WestfallvSingleton.pdf|''Westfall v. Singleton'']], 1 Va. (1 Wash.) 227 (1793),<ref>Bushrod Washington, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Virginia,''(Richmond: T. Nicolson, 1798), 1:227. </ref> is a land dispute case.
==Background==
In 1749, lord Fairfax publicly advertised for settlers to live in Northern Neck and promised to grant land rights for those who settled there. However, a man named Vanderpool, who previously settled in Northern Neck, about this time, sold his land to Abel Westfall. Abel possessed the property until 1755, when he died interstate and left two sons—Cornelius and John. In 1770, Lord Fairfax conveyed land including Abel's property to Bryant Martin. The conveyance gave Bryant the disputed land for three lives and was renewable forever, so long as Bryant paid rent. Cornelius, who was living in New Jersey at the time of father's death, took possession of the land in 1773. Cornelius paid rent to Lord Fairfax for some years, though lord Fairfax never officially conveyed the land to him. Regardless, Cornelius passed down the property to his sons, Issac and Zachariah, 1780, who later conveyed the land to Jacob Westfall, the plaintiff of this case. Jacob sued Singleton in the High Court of Chancery to obtain the undisputed property rights of the land. Singleton answered the suit stating that he purchased the land from John Westfall, Abel Westfall's youngest son, and he obtained an official deed for the land from lord Fairfax in 1773.
===The Court's Decision===
Chancellor Wythe dismissed the case stating there was no equity admitted by the answer or established by the evidence. The Court of Appeals reversed the ruling. The Court reasoned that if lord Fairfax was advertising titles, he should have granted titles to those who had already settled on the land. If this is the case, Abel would have undisputed title to the property and that title would be passed down to his eldest son, Cornelius. Thus, since John obtained his title through the elder Westfall, he was the rightful owner of the land.
==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Wolcott v. Swan

2018-05-08T18:44:17Z

Drbordley: /* The Court's Decision */

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Wolcott v. Swan''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:CallsReports1854V2WolcottvSwan.pdf|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:CallsReports1854V2WolcottvSwan.pdf|''Wolcott v. Swan'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia''], by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854.]]
[[Media:CallsReports1854V2WolcottvSwan.pdf|''Wolcott v. Swan'']], 6 Va. 297, 2 Call 298 (1800),<ref> Daniel Call, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia,''3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. (Richmond: A. Morris, 1854), 2:298. </ref> was a land dispute case.
==Background==
Smyth agreed to located land in Russell County for Wolcott and his friends. On July 21, 1795, Smyth also agreed to locate land for M’Rae, a representative of James Swan. On September 14, 1795, M'Rae gave Smyth land-warrants amounting to 300,000 acres to purchase the land he found in Russell County. After this, Wolcott's friends decide not to purchase the land, but Wolcott paid Smyth a considerable sum of money to renew his contract for the land. As a result, Smyth gave Wolcott M'Rae's land-warrants and entries and transferred M'Rae's entries to land in Lee County. Wolcott took the entries to the Register of the Land Office to obtain a deed for the land. This prompted M'Rae and James Swan to sue Smyth, Wolcott, and Price, the Register for the Land Office in the High Court of Chancery. The complaint prayed that the Court enjoin the Register from issuing a patent on the land and that the 300,000 acres in Russel County be issued to Swan instead.
===The Court's Decision===
Chancellor Wythe found in favor of M'Rae and Swan, but also ordered “that plaintiff James Swan should, within two months from that date, release all his right and title in and to the lands entered for him in the county of Lee, by the defendant Smyth”. The Court of Appeals reversed in part, but upheld the portions of decree granting Swan property rights to the land in Russell County.

==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Wolcott v. Swan

2018-05-08T18:43:44Z

Drbordley: Created page with "{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Wolcott v. Swan''}} File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:CallsReports1854V2WolcottvSwan.pdf|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:CallsRep..."

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Wolcott v. Swan''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:CallsReports1854V2WolcottvSwan.pdf|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:CallsReports1854V2WolcottvSwan.pdf|''Wolcott v. Swan'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia''], by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854.]]
[[Media:CallsReports1854V2WolcottvSwan.pdf|''Wolcott v. Swan'']], 6 Va. 297, 2 Call 298 (1800),<ref> Daniel Call, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia,''3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. (Richmond: A. Morris, 1854), 2:298. </ref> was a land dispute case.
==Background==
Smyth agreed to located land in Russell County for Wolcott and his friends. On July 21, 1795, Smyth also agreed to locate land for M’Rae, a representative of James Swan. On September 14, 1795, M'Rae gave Smyth land-warrants amounting to 300,000 acres to purchase the land he found in Russell County. After this, Wolcott's friends decide not to purchase the land, but Wolcott paid Smyth a considerable sum of money to renew his contract for the land. As a result, Smyth gave Wolcott M'Rae's land-warrants and entries and transferred M'Rae's entries to land in Lee County. Wolcott took the entries to the Register of the Land Office to obtain a deed for the land. This prompted M'Rae and James Swan to sue Smyth, Wolcott, and Price, the Register for the Land Office in the High Court of Chancery. The complaint prayed that the Court enjoin the Register from issuing a patent on the land and that the 300,000 acres in Russel County be issued to Swan instead.
===The Court's Decision===
Chancellor Wythe found in favor of M'Rae and Swan, but also ordered “that plaintiff James Swan should, within two month from that date, release all his right and title in and to the lands entered for him in the county of Lee, by the defendant Smyth”. The Court of Appeals reversed in part, but upheld the portions of decree granting Swan property rights to the land in Russell County.
==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Woodson v. Barrett and Co.

2018-05-08T18:12:54Z

Drbordley: /* Background */

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District''], by William Hening and William Munford. Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809.]]
[[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.'']], 12 Va. (2 Hen. & M.) 80 (1808),<ref>William Hening and William Munford, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District,'' (Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809), 2:80. </ref> was a case involving the use of illegal gaming bonds to satisfy a debt.

==Background==
In 1783, Joseph Woodson gambled with Thomas Miller and lost, owing Thomas £1400 in officer’s certificates. Around the same time, Thomas also lost a card game to John Jouitt, Jr. for about the same amount. A short while afterwards Joseph, Thomas, and John were hanging out and began to discuss the various debts. Thomas realizing that Joseph owed him and he owed John, proposed that Joseph just pay John the £1400 in officer's certificates. The men agreed and Joseph wrote out his bond to John payable May 1, 1784. However, to get his payment sooner, John told Joseph to pay him back in gaming bonds instead. On the day that Joseph was to deliver the gaming bonds to John, John Jouitt, Jr. sent John Barrett to the meeting instead. John Jouitt, Jr. was indebted to John Barrett and assigned Joseph's debt to Barrett's company. When Joseph offered John Barrett his gaming bonds, John Barrett refused to take them as payment and sued Joseph in Henrico County Court.

Joseph was embarrassed by the situation and did not provide his attorney enough information for adequate representation. As a result, John Barrett obtained a judgement against Joseph and placed a lien on his land. The lien was given to William Royster, the Sheriff of Goochland, for execution. However, one of William's deputies improperly executed the lien and John Barrett sued William in the Richmond District Court. All of William's witnesses failed to show to trial, so John Barrett recovered damages from Williams for about 446£. Joseph was advised that he could be held personally liable for William's judgment. Acknowledging that his land could not cover the judgement against him and the sheriff, Joseph filed suit in the High Court of Chancery asking the Court to grant an injunction against William's judgment.
===The Court's Decision===
Chancellor Wythe was of the opinion that since Joseph was aware of the gaming bonds and used those bonds to pay off his debts, he could not be protected from the unlawful gaming statute. Due to this, Wythe dismissed the case and required Joseph pay all court costs. The Court of Appeals reversed the decree and perpetuated the injunction.

==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Woodson v. Barrett and Co.

2018-05-08T18:12:15Z

Drbordley:

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District''], by William Hening and William Munford. Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809.]]
[[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.'']], 12 Va. (2 Hen. & M.) 80 (1808),<ref>William Hening and William Munford, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District,'' (Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809), 2:80. </ref> was a case involving the use of illegal gaming bonds to satisfy a debt.

==Background==
In 1783, Joseph Woodson gambled with Thomas Miller and lost, owing Thomas £1400 in officer’s certificates. Around the same time, Thomas also lost a card game to John Jouitt, Jr. for about the same amount. A short while afterwards Joseph, Thomas, and John were hanging out and began to discuss the various debts. Thomas realizing that Joseph owed him and he owed John, proposed that Joseph just pay John the £1400 in officer's certificates. The men agreed and Joseph wrote out his bond to John payable May 1, 1784. However, to get his payment sooner, John told Joseph to pay him back in gaming bonds instead. On the day that Joseph was to deliver the gaming bonds to John, John Jouitt, Jr. sent John Barrett to the meeting instead. John Jouitt,Jr. was indebted to John Barrett and assigned Joseph's debt to Barrett's company. When Joseph offered John Barrett his gaming bonds, John Barrett refused to take them as payment and sued Joseph in Henrico County Court.

Joseph was embarrassed by the situation and did not provide his attorney enough information for adequate representation. As a result, John Barrett obtained a judgement against Joseph and placed a lien on his land. The lien was given to William Royster, the Sheriff of Goochland, for execution. However, one of William's deputies improperly executed the lien and John Barrett sued William in the Richmond District Court. All of William's witnesses failed to show to trial, so John Barrett recovered damages from Williams for about 446£. Joseph was advised that he could be held personally liable for William's judgment. Acknowledging that his land could not cover the judgement against him and the sheriff, Joseph filed suit in the High Court of Chancery asking the Court to grant an injunction against William's judgment.
===The Court's Decision===
Chancellor Wythe was of the opinion that since Joseph was aware of the gaming bonds and used those bonds to pay off his debts, he could not be protected from the unlawful gaming statute. Due to this, Wythe dismissed the case and required Joseph pay all court costs. The Court of Appeals reversed the decree and perpetuated the injunction.
==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Woodson v. Barrett and Co.

2018-05-08T18:11:55Z

Drbordley:

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District''], by William Hening and William Munford. Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809.]]
[[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.'']], 12 Va. (2 Hen. & M.) 80 (1808),<ref>William Hening and William Munford, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District,'' (Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809), 2:80. </ref> was a case involving...

==Background==
In 1783, Joseph Woodson gambled with Thomas Miller and lost, owing Thomas £1400 in officer’s certificates. Around the same time, Thomas also lost a card game to John Jouitt, Jr. for about the same amount. A short while afterwards Joseph, Thomas, and John were hanging out and began to discuss the various debts. Thomas realizing that Joseph owed him and he owed John, proposed that Joseph just pay John the £1400 in officer's certificates. The men agreed and Joseph wrote out his bond to John payable May 1, 1784. However, to get his payment sooner, John told Joseph to pay him back in gaming bonds instead. On the day that Joseph was to deliver the gaming bonds to John, John Jouitt, Jr. sent John Barrett to the meeting instead. John Jouitt,Jr. was indebted to John Barrett and assigned Joseph's debt to Barrett's company. When Joseph offered John Barrett his gaming bonds, John Barrett refused to take them as payment and sued Joseph in Henrico County Court.

Joseph was embarrassed by the situation and did not provide his attorney enough information for adequate representation. As a result, John Barrett obtained a judgement against Joseph and placed a lien on his land. The lien was given to William Royster, the Sheriff of Goochland, for execution. However, one of William's deputies improperly executed the lien and John Barrett sued William in the Richmond District Court. All of William's witnesses failed to show to trial, so John Barrett recovered damages from Williams for about 446£. Joseph was advised that he could be held personally liable for William's judgment. Acknowledging that his land could not cover the judgement against him and the sheriff, Joseph filed suit in the High Court of Chancery asking the Court to grant an injunction against William's judgment.
===The Court's Decision===
Chancellor Wythe was of the opinion that since Joseph was aware of the gaming bonds and used those bonds to pay off his debts, he could not be protected from the unlawful gaming statute. Due to this, Wythe dismissed the case and required Joseph pay all court costs. The Court of Appeals reversed the decree and perpetuated the injunction.
==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Woodson v. Barrett and Co.

2018-05-08T18:10:53Z

Drbordley: Created page with "{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.''}} File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|thumb|right|300px|First page of..."

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District''], by William Hening and William Munford. Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809.]]
[[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf ‎|''Woodson v. Barrett & Co.'']], 12 Va. (2 Hen. & M.) 80 (1808),<ref>William Hening and William Munford, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District,''(Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809), 2:80. </ref> was a case involving...

==Background==
In 1783, Joseph Woodson gambled with Thomas Miller and lost, owing Thomas £1400 in officer’s certificates. Around the same time, Thomas also lost a card game to John Jouitt, Jr. for about the same amount. A short while afterwards Joseph, Thomas, and John were hanging out and began to discuss the various debts. Thomas realizing that Joseph owed him and he owed John, proposed that Joseph just pay John the £1400 in officer's certificates. The men agreed and Joseph wrote out his bond to John payable May 1, 1784. However, to get his payment sooner, John told Joseph to pay him back in gaming bonds instead. On the day that Joseph was to deliver the gaming bonds to John, John Jouitt, Jr. sent John Barrett to the meeting instead. John Jouitt,Jr. was indebted to John Barrett and assigned Joseph's debt to Barrett's company. When Joseph offered John Barrett his gaming bonds, John Barrett refused to take them as payment and sued Joseph in Henrico County Court.

Joseph was embarrassed by the situation and did not provide his attorney enough information for adequate representation. As a result, John Barrett obtained a judgement against Joseph and placed a lien on his land. The lien was given to William Royster, the Sheriff of Goochland, for execution. However, one of William's deputies improperly executed the lien and John Barrett sued William in the Richmond District Court. All of William's witnesses failed to show to trial, so John Barrett recovered damages from Williams for about 446£. Joseph was advised that he could be held personally liable for William's judgment. Acknowledging that his land could not cover the judgement against him and the sheriff, Joseph filed suit in the High Court of Chancery asking the Court to grant an injunction against William's judgment.
===The Court's Decision===
Chancellor Wythe was of the opinion that since Joseph was aware of the gaming bonds and used those bonds to pay off his debts, he could not be protected from the unlawful gaming statute. Due to this, Wythe dismissed the case and required Joseph pay all court costs. The Court of Appeals reversed the decree and perpetuated the injunction.
==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Wright v. Dawney

2018-05-08T17:23:57Z

Drbordley: Created page with "{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Wright v. Dawney''}} File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1810V3WrightvDawney.pdf|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Me..."

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Wright v. Dawney''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1810V3WrightvDawney.pdf|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1810V3WrightvDawney.pdf|''Wright v. Dawney'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District''], by William Hening and William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1810.]]
In [[Media:Hening&MunfordsReports1810V3WrightvDawney.pdf|''Wright v. Dawney'']], 13 Va. (3 Hen. & M.) 259 (1808),<ref>William Hening and William Munford, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District,''(New York: I. Riley, 1810), 3:259. </ref> the Court determined whether the Chancellor's power over interlocutory decrees ceased at the end of the term.
==Background==
During a hearing between the parties, Chancellor Wythe denied Dawney's motion to appeal his interlocutory decree. However, in a subsequent term after a vacation of the Court, Wythe granted the appeal under a legislative act. Wright filed a motion to dismiss the appeal as improvidently granted. Wright claimed that Wythe had no right to allow the appeal after the term of the decree had ended.
===The Court's Decision===
The Court of Appeals denied the motion stating that Wythe did not exceed his powers in granting an appeal from an interlocutory decree. The Court reasoned that because the legislature did not explicitly restrict Chancellor Wythe from granting appeals on interlocutory decrees, he had an implicit power to do so.
==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Day v. Murdoch

2018-05-08T16:56:52Z

Drbordley: Created page with "{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Day v. Murdoch''}} File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:MunfordsReports1812V1YatesvMurdoch.pdf ‎|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:M..."

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Day v. Murdoch''}}
[[File:WytheAmblerVWyld1852.jpg|link=Media:MunfordsReports1812V1YatesvMurdoch.pdf ‎|thumb|right|300px|First page of the opinion [[Media:MunfordsReports1812V1YatesvMurdoch.pdf ‎|''Day v. Murdoch'']], in [https://catalog.swem.wm.edu/law/Record/2099031 ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia''], by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1812.]]
[[Media:MunfordsReports1812V1YatesvMurdoch.pdf ‎|''Day v. Murdoch'']], 15 Va. (1 Munf.) 460 (1810),<ref>William Munford, ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia,''(New York: I. Riley, 1812.), 1:460. </ref> was a case where the Court determined whether a British debtor's paper money payment was sufficient to satisfy its American creditor.

==Background==
Charles Yates, the executor of Daniel Payne, sued Murdoch and Walter Colquhoun in the High Court of Chancery. Murdoch was the only surviving partner of William Cuningham & Co., a British merchant, and Walter Colquhoun was the company's American agent. Charles's lawsuit alleged that Cuningham & Co. owed two currency debts to Daniel Payne's estate. The first debt totaled 373£ 11s. 7d. based on an account made on September 1, 1774. The second debt for 491£ arose when Payne sold the company several houses and lots in the town of Dumfries sometime in 1771. The primary point of dispute was a 423£ paper money payment an agent of Cuningham & Co. made to Daniel Payne on April 4th, 1777. The question before the court was whether the payment's nominal amount was equal to the principal and interest of the currency debt.

Charles argued that during his lifetime, Daniel Payne, refused to receive paper money. However, Daniel was forced to accept the payment after Cuningham & Co.'s agent threatened to report him to the Committee of Safety. The most convincing evidence came from Daniel's receipt where he stated: <blockquote>"Received, April 4th 1777, of Mr. James Robinson, 423£ 19s. current money of Virginia, being the amount of the principal and interest due to me in currency by Messrs. William Cuningham & Co. of Glasgow, at their Dumfries store, and exclusive of the sterling sum owing for the lots that I sold them; nevertheless, I demanded the currency debt when the rate of exchange was at 15%; if, on arbitration hereafter to be had, it should be determined that I am entitled to an allowance on that account, the said company are hereby subjected to such allowance."</blockquote> Based on this evidence, Charles Yates requested the court order a money judgment and grant Daniel relief. After Charles's death, the case was continued by his executor, Day.
===The Court's Decision===
On March 15, 1800, Chancellor Wythe ordered the Commissioners make a formal report of the debts. On May 18, 1801, Wythe decreed in favor of Daniel Payne for the balance reported by the Commissioner with interest beginning from April 4th, 1785. The Court of Appeals reversed.
==See also==
*[[Wythe's Judicial Career]]

==References==
<references/>

__NOTOC__
[[Category: Cases]]

Wythe's Judicial Career

2018-05-08T15:57:07Z

Drbordley: /* Cases from Virginia Reports */

[[File:Postcard10_Detail.jpg|thumb|right|300px|<p>Detail from first day cover postcard for June 20, 1985, with cachet of [[George Wythe]].]]
Despite being one of the more obscure Founding Fathers, [[George Wythe]] played an important role in the early history of the United States. [http://www.wm.edu William & Mary's] -- and the United States' -- [[Wythe the Teacher|first law professor]], he was a man of great integrity who greatly influenced some of the fledgling country's most important figures with jurisprudential ideas that were often ahead of their time. Why do Americans not know more about this teacher, judge, delegate to the Second Continental Congress, and signer of the [[Declaration of Independence]]? One reason may be a lack of documentation. Thomas Jefferson said he had often seen Wythe toss the documents he created while working on a case into the fire upon the case's conclusion.<ref>Robert B. Kirtland, ''[[George Wythe: Lawyer, Revolutionary, Judge]]'' (New York: Garland Publishing, 1986), 5-6.</ref> The notes Wythe made as William & Mary's [[Professor of Law and Police]] scattered to places unknown long ago.<ref>For more information on the fate of Wythe's personal papers, see the Wythepedia article [[Wythe's Lost Papers]].</ref>

In 1778, Wythe was appointed to the newly created High Court of Chancery.<ref>Beverly Tucker describes the choice of Wythe as a judge, in ''The Principles of Pleading'' (Boston: Charles C. Little & James Brown, 1846), 56:<blockquote>...the people were not wholly insensible of the want of a Court of somewhat different character; and to supply that want was one of the objects, to which the framers of the new Constitution directed their attention. To do this, they established three Courts, for which sixteen Judges learned in the law were wanting. The difficulty was to find the men fit to fill these important posts. ''Integrity'' and ''talent'' were abundant, but a ''learned'' lawyer was indeed a ''rara avis.'' What motive had the lawyers had to acquire learning? With the exception of some few who had studied the profession abroad, and had not been long enough in Virginia to lose the memory of what they knew, in the loose practice prevailing here, there was but one man in the State who had any claims to the character. I speak of the venerable Chancellor Wythe, a man who differed from his contemporaries in this, because in his ordinary motives and modes of action he differed altogether from other men. Without ambition, without avarice, taking no pleasure in society, he was by nature and habit addicted to solitude, and his active mind found its only enjoyment in profound research. The languages of antiquity, the exact sciences, and the law, were the three studies which alone could be pursued with a reasonable hope of arriving at that certainty which his upright and truth-loving mind contemplated as the only object worthy of his labors. To these he devoted himself, and he became a profound lawyer for the same reason that he was a profound Greek scholar, astronomer and mathematician.</blockquote></ref> As a member of the Chancery Court, Wythe also heard appellate cases. An Act of the Assembly in 1779 required all three of the initial Chancery Court judges to serve ''ex officio'' on the Court of Appeals with judges from the Court of Admiralty and the General Court.<ref>Thomas Alonzo Dill, ''George Wythe: Teacher of Liberty'' (Williamsburg, Va.: Virginia Independence Bicentennial Commission, 1979), 40.</ref> When the Assembly reorganized the courts in 1788 and created a permanent Court of Appeals, Wythe remained as the sole chancellor with his decisions subject to review by the Court of Appeals.<ref>William Brockenbrough, [https://books.google.com/books?id=oTETAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Virginia Cases: Or, Decisions of the General Court of Virginia,''] Vol. 2 (Richmond, VA: Peter Cottom, 1826), xiii.</ref>

In 1780, Wythe — along with [[wikipedia:William Paca|William Paca]] of Maryland and [[wikipedia:Titus Hosmer|Titus Hosmer]] of Connecticut — was [[Samuel Huntington to Wythe et al., 2 February 1780|elected one of three judges]] to serve on the [[wikipedia:Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture|Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture]], a newly-established federal appeals court (pre-dating the U.S. Supreme Court by nearly a decade) to hear cases from all Courts of Admiralty. [[Wythe to Samuel Huntington, 21 February 1780|Wythe declined the appointment]], and [[wikipedia:Cyrus Griffin|Cyrus Griffin]] was chosen in his place.<ref>Hampton L. Carson, [https://books.google.com/books?id=brAOp7K8ukMC&pg=PA55 ''The Supreme Court of the United States: Its History''] (Philadelphia: A.R. Keller, 1892), 1:55-56.</ref>

Wythe's career as a judge may be the best-documented aspect of his life. We have multiple sources for Wythe's decisions, including decisions published by Wythe himself and decisions published in the ''Virginia Reports''. The latter include landmark Court of Appeals cases such as ''Commonwealth v. Caton''.

==Cases published by Wythe==
Wythe compiled a volume of some of his Chancery Court cases, now known as ''[[Wythe's Reports]]''.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]]'' (Richmond: Printed by Thomas Nicolson, 1795).</ref> Several decades after Wythe died, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Blake_Minor Benjamin Blake Minor] edited a second edition of the ''Reports'' that added decisions Wythe published separately.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery with Remarks upon Decrees by the Court of Appeals, Reversing Some of Those Decisions|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]],'' 2nd ed., ed. B.B. Minor (Richmond: J.W. Randolph, 1852).</ref>

The ''Reports'' contain cases that Wythe heard as Virginia's High Chancellor, the judge who sat on the commonwealth's High Court of Chancery, a court of equity. In the Anglo-American legal system, equity developed as an alternative set of remedies to the common law system; equity was supposed to provide a solution when the common law outcome would not provide proper justice. In the early days of the United States, many states had separate courts to hear equity cases. Equity cases usually involved property, contract, and inheritance disputes, so those are the cases the reader will find in ''Wythe's Reports''. Wythepedia has created pages for each of the decisions in the ''Reports'' summarizing the case and its background and explaining references to sources Wythe cited. We can think of ''Wythe's Reports'' as his version of a casebook, the textbooks that modern law students are familiar with. Wythe excerpts and summarizes the court's decisions, sometimes including subsequent appeals to other courts, then comments on them. Wythe hopes that by reading his commentaries on the courts' decisions, future lawyers and students of law will reach a better understanding of the law as it was in Virginia and how he thought it ''should'' be.

Wythe's ''Reports'' demands a lot from its readers. Wythe frequently cited or alluded to Ancient Greek and Latin works (often in their original language, with no English translation), as well as more recent classic authors such as Cervantes, Dante, and Shakespeare. He frequently used shorthand references and terms of art that lawyers of his era would understand, but which may baffle 21st-century readers. Wythe frequently left out information such as how the case arrived before him or facts that Wythe found irrelevant to the point he was trying to make. Often, if a Wythe decision was appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, that higher court's opinion would be a better source for the facts of the case.

Properly understanding Wythe's decisions also means knowing their historical context. Many of the cases Wythe decided were influenced by events that were familiar to educated people in his day, but are esoteric history to modern Americans. Wythe also believed that Roman law principles were sometimes superior to English legal precedent, and cautioned against blindly following England's caselaw. Wythe believed, as did many of his contemporaries, that as a new country, the United States might wish to follow European-style civil law principles rather than Anglo common law.<ref>Timothy G. Kearley, "From Rome to the Restatement", ''Law Library Journal'' 108(1) (Winter 2016): 60.</ref>

Another important piece of subtext lurking within ''Wythe's Reports'' is its author's long rivalry with [[Edmund Pendleton]], President of the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Wythe had arguably the most brilliant jurisprudential mind of his generation, and he was rarely defeated when he argued a case. The gregarious Pendleton, however, was a master litigator and one of the few people capable of defeating Wythe in court. As President of the Supreme Court, Pendleton reversed a substantial number of Wythe's decisions.

Wythepedia articles on the cases in ''Wythe's Reports'' summarize the case, and include notes and links to useful articles that can better explain the conflict and reasoning in the case. Wythepedia also includes articles that fill in the background behind a number of these decisions. ''Wythe's Reports'' can be a treatise on Virginia law and equity, a snapshot of life in Virginia during the late 18th century, and a profile of one of this nation's most underappreciated Founders.

<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Ambler v. Wyld]]''
*''[[Aylett v. Aylett]]''
*''[[Bailey v. Teackle]]''
*''[[Beverley v. Rennolds]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Cadwallader v. Mason]]''
*''[[Cary v. Buxton]]''
*''[[Case upon the Statute for Distribution]]''
*''[[Cobs v. Mosby]]''
*''[[Cochran v. Street]]''
*''[[Cole v. Scott]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Lyon]]''
*''[[Dawson v. Winslow]]''
*''[[Devisme v. Martin]]''
*''[[Farley v. Shippen]]''
*''[[Farrar v. Jackson]]''
*''[[Field v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock]]''
*''[[Hamilton & Co. v. Urquhart]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Allen]]''
*''[[Hearne v. Roane]]''
*''[[Hill v. Gregory]]''
*''[[Hinde v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Kelsick]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Kuhn]]''
*''[[Hylton v. Hunter]]''
*''[[Jones v. White]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Donelson]]''
*''[[Maze v. Hamilton]]''
*''[[Nance v. Woodward]]''
*''[[Overstreet v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Overton v. Ross]]''
*''[[Page v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Hoomes]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Lomax]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Roane v. Innis]]''
*''[[Rose v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pines]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Richardson]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Turpin]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Williams v. Jacob]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Rucker]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Woods v. Macrae]]''
*''[[Yates v. Salle]]''
</div>

==Cases from Virginia Reports==
<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Alexander v. Morris]]''
*''[[Allen v. Minor]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Fox]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Gest]]''
*''[[Applebury v. Anthony]]''
*''[[Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas|The Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Chevallie|The Auditor v. Chevallie]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x|The Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x]]''
*''[[Austin's Admin v. Winston's Executrix]]''
*''[[Baird v. Bland]]''
*''[[Barnett & Co. v. Smith & Co.]]''
*''[[Barrett v. Floyd]]''
*''[[Beckwith v. Butler]]''
*''[[Bedford v. Hickman]]''
*''[[Bernard v. Hipkins]]''
*''[[Blane v. Proudfit]]''
*''[[Blane v. Smith]]''
*''[[Blanton v. Brackett]]''
*''[[Blunt v. Gee]]''
*''[[Branch v. Burnley]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Andrews]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Gaines]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Lee's heirs]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Morris]]''
*''[[Brewer v. Hastie & Co.]]''
*''[[Brown v. Brown]]''
*''[[Browne v. Turberville]]''
*''[[Buckner v. Smith]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock|Bullock v. Goodall]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Campbell v. Price]]''
*''[[Carter's Ex'or v. Currie]]''
*''[[Cary v. Macon]]''
*''[[Chandler's Executrix v. Hill]]''
*''[[Chapman's Adm'x v. Turner]]''
*''[[Chapmans v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Cheshire v. Atkinson]]''
*''[[Chichester's Ex'x v. Vass's Adm'r.]]''
*''[[Chisholm v. Starke]]''
*''[[Claiborne v. Henderson]]''
*''[[Clarke v. Conn]]''
*''[[Clay v. Williams]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Beaumarchais]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Bristow]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Colquhouns]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Ronald]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Walker's Exc'r]]''
*''[[Countz v. Geiger]]''
*''[[Coutt's Trustees v. Craig]]''
*''[[Coutts v. Greenhow]]''
*''[[Cowles v. Brown]]''
*''[[Cringan v. Nicolson's Exec'rs]]''
*''[[Croughton v. Duval]]''
*''[[Curry v. Burns]]''
*''[[Dabney v. Green]]''
*''[[Dalby v. Price]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Dorrington]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Harris]]''
*''[[Dangerfield v. Rootes]]''
*''[[Davenport v. Mason]]''
*''[[Day v. Murdoch]]''
*''[[Deanes v. Scriba]]''
*''[[Deneale v. Morgan's Ex'ors]]''
*''[[Dunn v. Bray]]''
*''[[Duval v. Bibb]]''
*''[[Ellzey v. Lane's Executrix]]''
*''[[Engle v. Burns]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Tucker]]''
*''[[Fitzgerald v. Jones]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Foote]]''
*''[[Fleming v. Bolling]]''
*''[[Flemings v. Willis]]''
*''[[Fletcher v. Pollard]]''
*''[[Ford v. Gardner]]''
*''[[Foster v. Crenshaw's Exec'ors]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Franklin v. Wilkinson]]''
*''[[Freelands v. Royall]]''
*''[[Goodwin v. Miller]]''
*''[[Graham v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Granberry v. Granberry]]''
*''[[Grantland v. Wight]]''
*''[[Green v. Price]]''
*''[[Hackett v. Alcock]]''
*''[[Hadfield v. Jameson]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Harvey v. Borden]]''
*''[[Hawkins's Ex'ors v. Minor, Ex'or of Berkeley]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Hudson]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Lightfoot]]''
*''[[Hite's Exec. v. Paul's heirs]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Marquess]]''
*''[[Hook v. Ross]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Smock]]''
*''[[Hopkins v. Blane]]''
*''[[Hord v. Dishman]]''
*''[[Hudgins v. Wrights]]''
*''[[Hunter v. Hall]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Brown]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Buffington]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Jones v. Roberts]]''
*''[[Jones v. Tomlinson]]''
*''[[Jones v. Williams]]''
*''[[Latham v. Latham]]''
*''[[Lawrason v. Davenport]]''
*''[[Lee v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Lewis's Ex'or v. Bacon]]''
*''[[Lindsay v. Howerton]]''
*''[[Lipscomb's Adm. v. Winston]]''
*''[[Lomax v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Long v. Colston]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Ross, Shore & Co.]]''
*''[[Madison v. Vaughan]]''
*''[[Maupin v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Mayo v. Bentley]]''
*''[[M'Call v. Peachy]]''
*''[[M'Connico v. Curzen]]''
*''[[Meredith v. Johns]]''
*''[[Mills v. Bell]]''
*''[[Minnis v. Aylett]]''
*''[[M'Kim v. Fulton]]''
*''[[Moore's Executor v. Aylett's Executor]]''
*''[[Moring v. Lucas]]''
*''[[Morris v. Owen]]''
*''[[Morris v. Ross]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1795)]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1807)]]''
*''[[Mutual Assurance Co. v. Mahon]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Harwood]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Suddarth]]''
*''[[Nice v. Purcell]]''
*''[[Nicholas's Executors v. Tyler]]''
*''[[Norton v. Rose]]''
*''[[Page's Exec. v. Winston's Adm'r]]''
*''[[Payne v. Dudley]]''
*''[[Paynes v. Coles]]''
*''[[Pendleton's Exc'r v. Stewart]]''
*''[[Perkins v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Picket v. Dowdall]]''
*''[[Picket v. Morris]]''
*''[[Pleasants v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Cartwright]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Patterson's Adm.]]''
*''[[Pope v. Towles]]''
*''[[President & Professors & Masters of William & Mary Coll. v. Hodgson|The President and Professors and Masters of William & Mary College v. Hodgson]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1799)]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1804)]]''
*''[[Price v. Crump]]''
*''[[Price v. Strange]]''
*''[[Pryor v. Adams]]''
*''[[Quarrier v. Carter's Rep.]]''
*''[[Quesnel v. Woodlief]]''
*''[[Randolph v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Randolph's Ex'r v. Randolph's Ex'rs]]''
*''[[Richardson v. Baker]]''
*''[[Richardson's Ex'r v. Hunt]]''
*''[[Robert's Widow v. Stanton]]''
*''[[Robertson v. Campbell]]''
*''[[Rose v. Murchie]]''
*''[[Ross v. Colville & Co.]]''
*''[[Rowton v. Rowton]]''
*''[[Sallee v. Yates]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'r v. Osborne's Ex'r]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'rs v. Trents]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Shermer]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1800)]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1801)]]''
*''[[Smallwood v. Mercer]]''
*''[[Smith v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Smith v. Wallace]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Spottswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Stanard v. Brownlow]]''
*''[[Stannard v. Graves]]''
*''[[Stephens v. Cobun]]''
*''[[Stockton v. Cook]]''
*''[[Syme v. Johnston]]''
*''[[Tabb v. Archer]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro's Ex'rs v. Thornton]]''
*''[[Tarpley's Admin. v. Dobyns]]''
*''[[Taylor v. Stone]]''
*''[[Taylor's Admin. v. Nicolson]]''
*''[[Templeman v. Steptoe]]''
*''[[Thornton v. Corbin]]''
*''[[Tinsley v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard/Mackey v. Bell]]''
*''[[Towler v. Buchanans & Co.]]''
*''[[Triplett v. Wilson]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Locket]]''
*''[[Turnpin v. Thomas]]''
*''[[Upshaw v. Upshaw]]''
*''[[Walcott v. Swan]]''
*''[[Walker v. Walke]]''
*''[[Wallace v. Taliaferro]]''
*''[[Ward v. Webber]]''
*''[[Westfall v. Singleton]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1795)]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1800)]]''
*''[[Wigglesworth v. Steers]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Keeling]]''
*''[[Winston v. Johnson's Exec.]]''
*''[[Wolcott v. Swan]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Barrett & Co.]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Payne]]''
*''[[Worsham v. M'Kenzie]]''
*''[[Wright v. Dawney]]''
*''[[Yancey v. Hopkins]]''
*''[[Yerby v. Yerby]]''
*''[[Young v. Price]]''
*''[[Young v. Skipwith]]''
</div>

==County court cases==

*''[[Warrington v. Jiggitts]]''

==Court of Appeals cases==
*''[[Commonwealth v. Caton]]''

==See also==
*''[[Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery|Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery]]''
*[[George Wythe and Slavery]]
*[[Land Disputes in Western Virginia]]
*[[Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall|The Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall]]
*[[Virginia Hyperinflation and Debt]]
*[[Women's Legal Rights in Wythe's Time]]

==References==
<references />

==Further reading==
*Bryson, W. Hamilton. "The Use of Roman Law in Virginia Courts." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 28 (1984): 135-146.
*Hoffman, Richard J. "Classics in the Courts of the United States, 1790-1800." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 55 (1978): 55-84.
*Holt, Wythe. "[http://www.law.ua.edu/pubs/lrarticles/Volume%2058/Issue%205/Holt.pdf George Wythe: Early Modern Judge.]" In ''Alabama Law Review'' 58, no. 5 (2007): 1009-1039.

==External links==
*[https://scvahistory.org/about/w/george-wythe-1779-1789/ George Wythe, August 30, 1779-March 5, 1789,] Virginia Appellate Court History.

[[Category: Aspects of Wythe's Life]]
[[Category: Cases]]

File:CallsReports1833V4WalcottvSwan.pdf

2018-05-08T15:43:05Z

Drbordley:

"Walcott v. Swan" from volume 4 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Decided in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. Richmond: R. I. Smith, 1833. [[Category:Cases]]

File:CallsReports1833V4WalcottvSwan.pdf

2018-05-08T15:42:47Z

Drbordley: "Walcott v. Swan." from volume 4 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Decided in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. Richmond: R. I. Smith, 1833. Category:Cases

"Walcott v. Swan." from volume 4 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Decided in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. Richmond: R. I. Smith, 1833. [[Category:Cases]]

File:WashingtonsReports1798V1WestfallvSingleton.pdf

2018-05-08T15:36:05Z

Drbordley: "Westfall v. Singleton" from volume 1 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Bushrod Washington. Richmond: T. Nicolson, 1798. Category:Cases

"Westfall v. Singleton" from volume 1 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Bushrod Washington. Richmond: T. Nicolson, 1798. [[Category:Cases]]

File:WashingtonsReports1799V2WhitevAtkinson.pdf

2018-05-08T15:29:21Z

Drbordley:

"White v. Atkinson" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Bushrod Washington. Richmond: T. Nicolson, 1799. [[Category:Cases]]

File:WashingtonsReports1799V2WhitevAtkinson.pdf

2018-05-08T15:28:46Z

Drbordley: "White v. Atkinson." from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Bushrod Washington. Richmond: T. Nicolson, 1799. Category:Cases

"White v. Atkinson." from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Bushrod Washington. Richmond: T. Nicolson, 1799. [[Category:Cases]]

File:CallsReports1854V2WhitevAtkinson(1800).pdf

2018-05-08T15:22:19Z

Drbordley: "White v. Atkinson" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. Category:Cases

"White v. Atkinson" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. [[Category:Cases]]

File:CallsReports1854V2WolcottvSwan.pdf

2018-05-08T15:15:38Z

Drbordley: "Wolcott v. Swan" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. Category:Cases

"Wolcott v. Swan" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. [[Category:Cases]]

File:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V2WoodsonvBarrett&Co.pdf

2018-05-08T15:10:30Z

Drbordley: "Woodson v. Barrett & Co." from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond Dist...

"Woodson v. Barrett & Co." from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District'', by William Hening and William Munford. Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809. [[Category:Cases]]

File:Hening&MunfordsReports1810V3WrightvDawney.pdf

2018-05-08T15:02:56Z

Drbordley: "Wright v. Dawney" from volume 3 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District'',...

"Wright v. Dawney" from volume 3 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District'', by William Hening and William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1810. [[Category:Cases]]

File:MunfordsReports1812V1YatesvMurdoch.pdf

2018-05-08T14:52:58Z

Drbordley: "Yates v. Murdoch" from volume 1 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1812. Category:Cases

"Yates v. Murdoch" from volume 1 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1812. [[Category:Cases]]

File:CallsReports1854V1TowlervBuchanans&Co.pdf

2018-05-07T20:23:14Z

Drbordley: "Towler v. Buchanans & Co." from volume 1 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. Category:Cases

"Towler v. Buchanans & Co." from volume 1 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. [[Category:Cases]]

Wythe's Judicial Career

2018-05-07T20:21:56Z

Drbordley: /* Cases from Virginia Reports */

[[File:Postcard10_Detail.jpg|thumb|right|300px|<p>Detail from first day cover postcard for June 20, 1985, with cachet of [[George Wythe]].]]
Despite being one of the more obscure Founding Fathers, [[George Wythe]] played an important role in the early history of the United States. [http://www.wm.edu William & Mary's] -- and the United States' -- [[Wythe the Teacher|first law professor]], he was a man of great integrity who greatly influenced some of the fledgling country's most important figures with jurisprudential ideas that were often ahead of their time. Why do Americans not know more about this teacher, judge, delegate to the Second Continental Congress, and signer of the [[Declaration of Independence]]? One reason may be a lack of documentation. Thomas Jefferson said he had often seen Wythe toss the documents he created while working on a case into the fire upon the case's conclusion.<ref>Robert B. Kirtland, ''[[George Wythe: Lawyer, Revolutionary, Judge]]'' (New York: Garland Publishing, 1986), 5-6.</ref> The notes Wythe made as William & Mary's [[Professor of Law and Police]] scattered to places unknown long ago.<ref>For more information on the fate of Wythe's personal papers, see the Wythepedia article [[Wythe's Lost Papers]].</ref>

In 1778, Wythe was appointed to the newly created High Court of Chancery.<ref>Beverly Tucker describes the choice of Wythe as a judge, in ''The Principles of Pleading'' (Boston: Charles C. Little & James Brown, 1846), 56:<blockquote>...the people were not wholly insensible of the want of a Court of somewhat different character; and to supply that want was one of the objects, to which the framers of the new Constitution directed their attention. To do this, they established three Courts, for which sixteen Judges learned in the law were wanting. The difficulty was to find the men fit to fill these important posts. ''Integrity'' and ''talent'' were abundant, but a ''learned'' lawyer was indeed a ''rara avis.'' What motive had the lawyers had to acquire learning? With the exception of some few who had studied the profession abroad, and had not been long enough in Virginia to lose the memory of what they knew, in the loose practice prevailing here, there was but one man in the State who had any claims to the character. I speak of the venerable Chancellor Wythe, a man who differed from his contemporaries in this, because in his ordinary motives and modes of action he differed altogether from other men. Without ambition, without avarice, taking no pleasure in society, he was by nature and habit addicted to solitude, and his active mind found its only enjoyment in profound research. The languages of antiquity, the exact sciences, and the law, were the three studies which alone could be pursued with a reasonable hope of arriving at that certainty which his upright and truth-loving mind contemplated as the only object worthy of his labors. To these he devoted himself, and he became a profound lawyer for the same reason that he was a profound Greek scholar, astronomer and mathematician.</blockquote></ref> As a member of the Chancery Court, Wythe also heard appellate cases. An Act of the Assembly in 1779 required all three of the initial Chancery Court judges to serve ''ex officio'' on the Court of Appeals with judges from the Court of Admiralty and the General Court.<ref>Thomas Alonzo Dill, ''George Wythe: Teacher of Liberty'' (Williamsburg, Va.: Virginia Independence Bicentennial Commission, 1979), 40.</ref> When the Assembly reorganized the courts in 1788 and created a permanent Court of Appeals, Wythe remained as the sole chancellor with his decisions subject to review by the Court of Appeals.<ref>William Brockenbrough, [https://books.google.com/books?id=oTETAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Virginia Cases: Or, Decisions of the General Court of Virginia,''] Vol. 2 (Richmond, VA: Peter Cottom, 1826), xiii.</ref>

In 1780, Wythe — along with [[wikipedia:William Paca|William Paca]] of Maryland and [[wikipedia:Titus Hosmer|Titus Hosmer]] of Connecticut — was [[Samuel Huntington to Wythe et al., 2 February 1780|elected one of three judges]] to serve on the [[wikipedia:Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture|Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture]], a newly-established federal appeals court (pre-dating the U.S. Supreme Court by nearly a decade) to hear cases from all Courts of Admiralty. [[Wythe to Samuel Huntington, 21 February 1780|Wythe declined the appointment]], and [[wikipedia:Cyrus Griffin|Cyrus Griffin]] was chosen in his place.<ref>Hampton L. Carson, [https://books.google.com/books?id=brAOp7K8ukMC&pg=PA55 ''The Supreme Court of the United States: Its History''] (Philadelphia: A.R. Keller, 1892), 1:55-56.</ref>

Wythe's career as a judge may be the best-documented aspect of his life. We have multiple sources for Wythe's decisions, including decisions published by Wythe himself and decisions published in the ''Virginia Reports''. The latter include landmark Court of Appeals cases such as ''Commonwealth v. Caton''.

==Cases published by Wythe==
Wythe compiled a volume of some of his Chancery Court cases, now known as ''[[Wythe's Reports]]''.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]]'' (Richmond: Printed by Thomas Nicolson, 1795).</ref> Several decades after Wythe died, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Blake_Minor Benjamin Blake Minor] edited a second edition of the ''Reports'' that added decisions Wythe published separately.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery with Remarks upon Decrees by the Court of Appeals, Reversing Some of Those Decisions|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]],'' 2nd ed., ed. B.B. Minor (Richmond: J.W. Randolph, 1852).</ref>

The ''Reports'' contain cases that Wythe heard as Virginia's High Chancellor, the judge who sat on the commonwealth's High Court of Chancery, a court of equity. In the Anglo-American legal system, equity developed as an alternative set of remedies to the common law system; equity was supposed to provide a solution when the common law outcome would not provide proper justice. In the early days of the United States, many states had separate courts to hear equity cases. Equity cases usually involved property, contract, and inheritance disputes, so those are the cases the reader will find in ''Wythe's Reports''. Wythepedia has created pages for each of the decisions in the ''Reports'' summarizing the case and its background and explaining references to sources Wythe cited. We can think of ''Wythe's Reports'' as his version of a casebook, the textbooks that modern law students are familiar with. Wythe excerpts and summarizes the court's decisions, sometimes including subsequent appeals to other courts, then comments on them. Wythe hopes that by reading his commentaries on the courts' decisions, future lawyers and students of law will reach a better understanding of the law as it was in Virginia and how he thought it ''should'' be.

Wythe's ''Reports'' demands a lot from its readers. Wythe frequently cited or alluded to Ancient Greek and Latin works (often in their original language, with no English translation), as well as more recent classic authors such as Cervantes, Dante, and Shakespeare. He frequently used shorthand references and terms of art that lawyers of his era would understand, but which may baffle 21st-century readers. Wythe frequently left out information such as how the case arrived before him or facts that Wythe found irrelevant to the point he was trying to make. Often, if a Wythe decision was appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, that higher court's opinion would be a better source for the facts of the case.

Properly understanding Wythe's decisions also means knowing their historical context. Many of the cases Wythe decided were influenced by events that were familiar to educated people in his day, but are esoteric history to modern Americans. Wythe also believed that Roman law principles were sometimes superior to English legal precedent, and cautioned against blindly following England's caselaw. Wythe believed, as did many of his contemporaries, that as a new country, the United States might wish to follow European-style civil law principles rather than Anglo common law.<ref>Timothy G. Kearley, "From Rome to the Restatement", ''Law Library Journal'' 108(1) (Winter 2016): 60.</ref>

Another important piece of subtext lurking within ''Wythe's Reports'' is its author's long rivalry with [[Edmund Pendleton]], President of the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Wythe had arguably the most brilliant jurisprudential mind of his generation, and he was rarely defeated when he argued a case. The gregarious Pendleton, however, was a master litigator and one of the few people capable of defeating Wythe in court. As President of the Supreme Court, Pendleton reversed a substantial number of Wythe's decisions.

Wythepedia articles on the cases in ''Wythe's Reports'' summarize the case, and include notes and links to useful articles that can better explain the conflict and reasoning in the case. Wythepedia also includes articles that fill in the background behind a number of these decisions. ''Wythe's Reports'' can be a treatise on Virginia law and equity, a snapshot of life in Virginia during the late 18th century, and a profile of one of this nation's most underappreciated Founders.

<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Ambler v. Wyld]]''
*''[[Aylett v. Aylett]]''
*''[[Bailey v. Teackle]]''
*''[[Beverley v. Rennolds]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Cadwallader v. Mason]]''
*''[[Cary v. Buxton]]''
*''[[Case upon the Statute for Distribution]]''
*''[[Cobs v. Mosby]]''
*''[[Cochran v. Street]]''
*''[[Cole v. Scott]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Lyon]]''
*''[[Dawson v. Winslow]]''
*''[[Devisme v. Martin]]''
*''[[Farley v. Shippen]]''
*''[[Farrar v. Jackson]]''
*''[[Field v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock]]''
*''[[Hamilton & Co. v. Urquhart]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Allen]]''
*''[[Hearne v. Roane]]''
*''[[Hill v. Gregory]]''
*''[[Hinde v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Kelsick]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Kuhn]]''
*''[[Hylton v. Hunter]]''
*''[[Jones v. White]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Donelson]]''
*''[[Maze v. Hamilton]]''
*''[[Nance v. Woodward]]''
*''[[Overstreet v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Overton v. Ross]]''
*''[[Page v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Hoomes]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Lomax]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Roane v. Innis]]''
*''[[Rose v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pines]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Richardson]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Turpin]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Williams v. Jacob]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Rucker]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Woods v. Macrae]]''
*''[[Yates v. Salle]]''
</div>

==Cases from Virginia Reports==
<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Alexander v. Morris]]''
*''[[Allen v. Minor]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Fox]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Gest]]''
*''[[Applebury v. Anthony]]''
*''[[Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas|The Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Chevallie|The Auditor v. Chevallie]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x|The Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x]]''
*''[[Austin's Admin v. Winston's Executrix]]''
*''[[Baird v. Bland]]''
*''[[Barnett & Co. v. Smith & Co.]]''
*''[[Barrett v. Floyd]]''
*''[[Beckwith v. Butler]]''
*''[[Bedford v. Hickman]]''
*''[[Bernard v. Hipkins]]''
*''[[Blane v. Proudfit]]''
*''[[Blane v. Smith]]''
*''[[Blanton v. Brackett]]''
*''[[Blunt v. Gee]]''
*''[[Branch v. Burnley]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Andrews]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Gaines]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Lee's heirs]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Morris]]''
*''[[Brewer v. Hastie & Co.]]''
*''[[Brown v. Brown]]''
*''[[Browne v. Turberville]]''
*''[[Buckner v. Smith]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock|Bullock v. Goodall]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Campbell v. Price]]''
*''[[Carter's Ex'or v. Currie]]''
*''[[Cary v. Macon]]''
*''[[Chandler's Executrix v. Hill]]''
*''[[Chapman's Adm'x v. Turner]]''
*''[[Chapmans v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Cheshire v. Atkinson]]''
*''[[Chichester's Ex'x v. Vass's Adm'r.]]''
*''[[Chisholm v. Starke]]''
*''[[Claiborne v. Henderson]]''
*''[[Clarke v. Conn]]''
*''[[Clay v. Williams]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Beaumarchais]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Bristow]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Colquhouns]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Ronald]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Walker's Exc'r]]''
*''[[Countz v. Geiger]]''
*''[[Coutt's Trustees v. Craig]]''
*''[[Coutts v. Greenhow]]''
*''[[Cowles v. Brown]]''
*''[[Cringan v. Nicolson's Exec'rs]]''
*''[[Croughton v. Duval]]''
*''[[Curry v. Burns]]''
*''[[Dabney v. Green]]''
*''[[Dalby v. Price]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Dorrington]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Harris]]''
*''[[Dangerfield v. Rootes]]''
*''[[Davenport v. Mason]]''
*''[[Deanes v. Scriba]]''
*''[[Deneale v. Morgan's Ex'ors]]''
*''[[Dunn v. Bray]]''
*''[[Duval v. Bibb]]''
*''[[Ellzey v. Lane's Executrix]]''
*''[[Engle v. Burns]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Tucker]]''
*''[[Fitzgerald v. Jones]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Foote]]''
*''[[Fleming v. Bolling]]''
*''[[Flemings v. Willis]]''
*''[[Fletcher v. Pollard]]''
*''[[Ford v. Gardner]]''
*''[[Foster v. Crenshaw's Exec'ors]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Franklin v. Wilkinson]]''
*''[[Freelands v. Royall]]''
*''[[Goodwin v. Miller]]''
*''[[Graham v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Granberry v. Granberry]]''
*''[[Grantland v. Wight]]''
*''[[Green v. Price]]''
*''[[Hackett v. Alcock]]''
*''[[Hadfield v. Jameson]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Harvey v. Borden]]''
*''[[Hawkins's Ex'ors v. Minor, Ex'or of Berkeley]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Hudson]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Lightfoot]]''
*''[[Hite's Exec. v. Paul's heirs]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Marquess]]''
*''[[Hook v. Ross]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Smock]]''
*''[[Hopkins v. Blane]]''
*''[[Hord v. Dishman]]''
*''[[Hudgins v. Wrights]]''
*''[[Hunter v. Hall]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Brown]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Buffington]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Jones v. Roberts]]''
*''[[Jones v. Tomlinson]]''
*''[[Jones v. Williams]]''
*''[[Latham v. Latham]]''
*''[[Lawrason v. Davenport]]''
*''[[Lee v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Lewis's Ex'or v. Bacon]]''
*''[[Lindsay v. Howerton]]''
*''[[Lipscomb's Adm. v. Winston]]''
*''[[Lomax v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Long v. Colston]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Ross, Shore & Co.]]''
*''[[Madison v. Vaughan]]''
*''[[Maupin v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Mayo v. Bentley]]''
*''[[M'Call v. Peachy]]''
*''[[M'Connico v. Curzen]]''
*''[[Meredith v. Johns]]''
*''[[Mills v. Bell]]''
*''[[Minnis v. Aylett]]''
*''[[M'Kim v. Fulton]]''
*''[[Moore's Executor v. Aylett's Executor]]''
*''[[Moring v. Lucas]]''
*''[[Morris v. Owen]]''
*''[[Morris v. Ross]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1795)]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1807)]]''
*''[[Mutual Assurance Co. v. Mahon]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Harwood]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Suddarth]]''
*''[[Nice v. Purcell]]''
*''[[Nicholas's Executors v. Tyler]]''
*''[[Norton v. Rose]]''
*''[[Page's Exec. v. Winston's Adm'r]]''
*''[[Payne v. Dudley]]''
*''[[Paynes v. Coles]]''
*''[[Pendleton's Exc'r v. Stewart]]''
*''[[Perkins v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Picket v. Dowdall]]''
*''[[Picket v. Morris]]''
*''[[Pleasants v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Cartwright]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Patterson's Adm.]]''
*''[[Pope v. Towles]]''
*''[[President & Professors & Masters of William & Mary Coll. v. Hodgson|The President and Professors and Masters of William & Mary College v. Hodgson]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1799)]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1804)]]''
*''[[Price v. Crump]]''
*''[[Price v. Strange]]''
*''[[Pryor v. Adams]]''
*''[[Quarrier v. Carter's Rep.]]''
*''[[Quesnel v. Woodlief]]''
*''[[Randolph v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Randolph's Ex'r v. Randolph's Ex'rs]]''
*''[[Richardson v. Baker]]''
*''[[Richardson's Ex'r v. Hunt]]''
*''[[Robert's Widow v. Stanton]]''
*''[[Robertson v. Campbell]]''
*''[[Rose v. Murchie]]''
*''[[Ross v. Colville & Co.]]''
*''[[Rowton v. Rowton]]''
*''[[Sallee v. Yates]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'r v. Osborne's Ex'r]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'rs v. Trents]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Shermer]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1800)]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1801)]]''
*''[[Smallwood v. Mercer]]''
*''[[Smith v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Smith v. Wallace]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Spottswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Stanard v. Brownlow]]''
*''[[Stannard v. Graves]]''
*''[[Stephens v. Cobun]]''
*''[[Stockton v. Cook]]''
*''[[Syme v. Johnston]]''
*''[[Tabb v. Archer]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro's Ex'rs v. Thornton]]''
*''[[Tarpley's Admin. v. Dobyns]]''
*''[[Taylor v. Stone]]''
*''[[Taylor's Admin. v. Nicolson]]''
*''[[Templeman v. Steptoe]]''
*''[[Thornton v. Corbin]]''
*''[[Tinsley v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard/Mackey v. Bell]]''
*''[[Towler v. Buchanans & Co.]]''
*''[[Triplett v. Wilson]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Locket]]''
*''[[Turnpin v. Thomas]]''
*''[[Upshaw v. Upshaw]]''
*''[[Walcott v. Swan]]''
*''[[Walker v. Walke]]''
*''[[Wallace v. Taliaferro]]''
*''[[Ward v. Webber]]''
*''[[Westfall v. Singleton]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1795)]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1800)]]''
*''[[Wigglesworth v. Steers]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Keeling]]''
*''[[Winston v. Johnson's Exec.]]''
*''[[Wolcott v. Swan]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Barrett & Co.]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Payne]]''
*''[[Worsham v. M'Kenzie]]''
*''[[Wright v. Dawney]]''
*''[[Yancey v. Hopkins]]''
*''[[Yates v. Murdoch]]''
*''[[Yerby v. Yerby]]''
*''[[Young v. Price]]''
*''[[Young v. Skipwith]]''
</div>

==County court cases==

*''[[Warrington v. Jiggitts]]''

==Court of Appeals cases==
*''[[Commonwealth v. Caton]]''

==See also==
*''[[Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery|Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery]]''
*[[George Wythe and Slavery]]
*[[Land Disputes in Western Virginia]]
*[[Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall|The Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall]]
*[[Virginia Hyperinflation and Debt]]
*[[Women's Legal Rights in Wythe's Time]]

==References==
<references />

==Further reading==
*Bryson, W. Hamilton. "The Use of Roman Law in Virginia Courts." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 28 (1984): 135-146.
*Hoffman, Richard J. "Classics in the Courts of the United States, 1790-1800." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 55 (1978): 55-84.
*Holt, Wythe. "[http://www.law.ua.edu/pubs/lrarticles/Volume%2058/Issue%205/Holt.pdf George Wythe: Early Modern Judge.]" In ''Alabama Law Review'' 58, no. 5 (2007): 1009-1039.

==External links==
*[https://scvahistory.org/about/w/george-wythe-1779-1789/ George Wythe, August 30, 1779-March 5, 1789,] Virginia Appellate Court History.

[[Category: Aspects of Wythe's Life]]
[[Category: Cases]]

File:Hening&MunfordsReports1810V3TomlinsonvDillard MackeyvBell.pdf

2018-05-07T20:14:31Z

Drbordley: "Tomlinson v. Dillard" from volume 3 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District...

"Tomlinson v. Dillard" from volume 3 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District'', by William Hening and William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1810. [[Category:Cases]]

File:CallsReports1833V6Taliaferro'sEx'rsvThornton.pdf

2018-05-07T20:05:55Z

Drbordley: "Taliaferro's Ex'rs v. Thornton" from volume 6 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Decided in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. Richmond: R. I. Smith, 1833. Category:Cases

"Taliaferro's Ex'rs v. Thornton" from volume 6 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Decided in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. Richmond: R. I. Smith, 1833. [[Category:Cases]]

File:MunfordsReports1816V3StanardvBrownlow.pdf

2018-05-07T19:52:52Z

Drbordley: "Stanard v. Brownlow" from volume 3 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1816. Category:Cases

"Stanard v. Brownlow" from volume 3 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1816. [[Category:Cases]]

File:MunfordsReports1817V4SpottswoodvDandridge.pdf

2018-05-07T19:45:25Z

Drbordley: "Spottswood v. Dandridge" from volume 4 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. Philadelphia: J. Webster, 1817. Category:Cases

"Spottswood v. Dandridge" from volume 4 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. Philadelphia: J. Webster, 1817. [[Category:Cases]]

File:Hening& MunfordsReports1810V3SpotswoodvDandridge.pdf

2018-05-07T19:30:36Z

Drbordley: "Spotswood v. Dandridge" from volume 3 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond Distri...

"Spotswood v. Dandridge" from volume 3 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District'', by William Hening and William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1810. [[Category:Cases]]

File:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V1SmithvChapman.pdf

2018-05-07T19:20:31Z

Drbordley: "Smith v. Chapman" from volume 1 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District'',...

"Smith v. Chapman" from volume 1 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District'', by William Hening and William Munford. Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809. [[Category:Cases]]

File:Hening&MunfordsReports1811V4Scott'sEx'rsvTrents.pdf

2018-05-07T19:11:55Z

Drbordley: "Scott's Ex'rs v. Trents" from volume 4 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice'', by William Hening and William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 181...

"Scott's Ex'rs v. Trents" from volume 4 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice'', by William Hening and William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1811. [[Category:Cases]]

Wythe's Judicial Career

2018-05-07T19:05:29Z

Drbordley: /* Cases from Virginia Reports */

[[File:Postcard10_Detail.jpg|thumb|right|300px|<p>Detail from first day cover postcard for June 20, 1985, with cachet of [[George Wythe]].]]
Despite being one of the more obscure Founding Fathers, [[George Wythe]] played an important role in the early history of the United States. [http://www.wm.edu William & Mary's] -- and the United States' -- [[Wythe the Teacher|first law professor]], he was a man of great integrity who greatly influenced some of the fledgling country's most important figures with jurisprudential ideas that were often ahead of their time. Why do Americans not know more about this teacher, judge, delegate to the Second Continental Congress, and signer of the [[Declaration of Independence]]? One reason may be a lack of documentation. Thomas Jefferson said he had often seen Wythe toss the documents he created while working on a case into the fire upon the case's conclusion.<ref>Robert B. Kirtland, ''[[George Wythe: Lawyer, Revolutionary, Judge]]'' (New York: Garland Publishing, 1986), 5-6.</ref> The notes Wythe made as William & Mary's [[Professor of Law and Police]] scattered to places unknown long ago.<ref>For more information on the fate of Wythe's personal papers, see the Wythepedia article [[Wythe's Lost Papers]].</ref>

In 1778, Wythe was appointed to the newly created High Court of Chancery.<ref>Beverly Tucker describes the choice of Wythe as a judge, in ''The Principles of Pleading'' (Boston: Charles C. Little & James Brown, 1846), 56:<blockquote>...the people were not wholly insensible of the want of a Court of somewhat different character; and to supply that want was one of the objects, to which the framers of the new Constitution directed their attention. To do this, they established three Courts, for which sixteen Judges learned in the law were wanting. The difficulty was to find the men fit to fill these important posts. ''Integrity'' and ''talent'' were abundant, but a ''learned'' lawyer was indeed a ''rara avis.'' What motive had the lawyers had to acquire learning? With the exception of some few who had studied the profession abroad, and had not been long enough in Virginia to lose the memory of what they knew, in the loose practice prevailing here, there was but one man in the State who had any claims to the character. I speak of the venerable Chancellor Wythe, a man who differed from his contemporaries in this, because in his ordinary motives and modes of action he differed altogether from other men. Without ambition, without avarice, taking no pleasure in society, he was by nature and habit addicted to solitude, and his active mind found its only enjoyment in profound research. The languages of antiquity, the exact sciences, and the law, were the three studies which alone could be pursued with a reasonable hope of arriving at that certainty which his upright and truth-loving mind contemplated as the only object worthy of his labors. To these he devoted himself, and he became a profound lawyer for the same reason that he was a profound Greek scholar, astronomer and mathematician.</blockquote></ref> As a member of the Chancery Court, Wythe also heard appellate cases. An Act of the Assembly in 1779 required all three of the initial Chancery Court judges to serve ''ex officio'' on the Court of Appeals with judges from the Court of Admiralty and the General Court.<ref>Thomas Alonzo Dill, ''George Wythe: Teacher of Liberty'' (Williamsburg, Va.: Virginia Independence Bicentennial Commission, 1979), 40.</ref> When the Assembly reorganized the courts in 1788 and created a permanent Court of Appeals, Wythe remained as the sole chancellor with his decisions subject to review by the Court of Appeals.<ref>William Brockenbrough, [https://books.google.com/books?id=oTETAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Virginia Cases: Or, Decisions of the General Court of Virginia,''] Vol. 2 (Richmond, VA: Peter Cottom, 1826), xiii.</ref>

In 1780, Wythe — along with [[wikipedia:William Paca|William Paca]] of Maryland and [[wikipedia:Titus Hosmer|Titus Hosmer]] of Connecticut — was [[Samuel Huntington to Wythe et al., 2 February 1780|elected one of three judges]] to serve on the [[wikipedia:Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture|Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture]], a newly-established federal appeals court (pre-dating the U.S. Supreme Court by nearly a decade) to hear cases from all Courts of Admiralty. [[Wythe to Samuel Huntington, 21 February 1780|Wythe declined the appointment]], and [[wikipedia:Cyrus Griffin|Cyrus Griffin]] was chosen in his place.<ref>Hampton L. Carson, [https://books.google.com/books?id=brAOp7K8ukMC&pg=PA55 ''The Supreme Court of the United States: Its History''] (Philadelphia: A.R. Keller, 1892), 1:55-56.</ref>

Wythe's career as a judge may be the best-documented aspect of his life. We have multiple sources for Wythe's decisions, including decisions published by Wythe himself and decisions published in the ''Virginia Reports''. The latter include landmark Court of Appeals cases such as ''Commonwealth v. Caton''.

==Cases published by Wythe==
Wythe compiled a volume of some of his Chancery Court cases, now known as ''[[Wythe's Reports]]''.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]]'' (Richmond: Printed by Thomas Nicolson, 1795).</ref> Several decades after Wythe died, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Blake_Minor Benjamin Blake Minor] edited a second edition of the ''Reports'' that added decisions Wythe published separately.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery with Remarks upon Decrees by the Court of Appeals, Reversing Some of Those Decisions|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]],'' 2nd ed., ed. B.B. Minor (Richmond: J.W. Randolph, 1852).</ref>

The ''Reports'' contain cases that Wythe heard as Virginia's High Chancellor, the judge who sat on the commonwealth's High Court of Chancery, a court of equity. In the Anglo-American legal system, equity developed as an alternative set of remedies to the common law system; equity was supposed to provide a solution when the common law outcome would not provide proper justice. In the early days of the United States, many states had separate courts to hear equity cases. Equity cases usually involved property, contract, and inheritance disputes, so those are the cases the reader will find in ''Wythe's Reports''. Wythepedia has created pages for each of the decisions in the ''Reports'' summarizing the case and its background and explaining references to sources Wythe cited. We can think of ''Wythe's Reports'' as his version of a casebook, the textbooks that modern law students are familiar with. Wythe excerpts and summarizes the court's decisions, sometimes including subsequent appeals to other courts, then comments on them. Wythe hopes that by reading his commentaries on the courts' decisions, future lawyers and students of law will reach a better understanding of the law as it was in Virginia and how he thought it ''should'' be.

Wythe's ''Reports'' demands a lot from its readers. Wythe frequently cited or alluded to Ancient Greek and Latin works (often in their original language, with no English translation), as well as more recent classic authors such as Cervantes, Dante, and Shakespeare. He frequently used shorthand references and terms of art that lawyers of his era would understand, but which may baffle 21st-century readers. Wythe frequently left out information such as how the case arrived before him or facts that Wythe found irrelevant to the point he was trying to make. Often, if a Wythe decision was appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, that higher court's opinion would be a better source for the facts of the case.

Properly understanding Wythe's decisions also means knowing their historical context. Many of the cases Wythe decided were influenced by events that were familiar to educated people in his day, but are esoteric history to modern Americans. Wythe also believed that Roman law principles were sometimes superior to English legal precedent, and cautioned against blindly following England's caselaw. Wythe believed, as did many of his contemporaries, that as a new country, the United States might wish to follow European-style civil law principles rather than Anglo common law.<ref>Timothy G. Kearley, "From Rome to the Restatement", ''Law Library Journal'' 108(1) (Winter 2016): 60.</ref>

Another important piece of subtext lurking within ''Wythe's Reports'' is its author's long rivalry with [[Edmund Pendleton]], President of the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Wythe had arguably the most brilliant jurisprudential mind of his generation, and he was rarely defeated when he argued a case. The gregarious Pendleton, however, was a master litigator and one of the few people capable of defeating Wythe in court. As President of the Supreme Court, Pendleton reversed a substantial number of Wythe's decisions.

Wythepedia articles on the cases in ''Wythe's Reports'' summarize the case, and include notes and links to useful articles that can better explain the conflict and reasoning in the case. Wythepedia also includes articles that fill in the background behind a number of these decisions. ''Wythe's Reports'' can be a treatise on Virginia law and equity, a snapshot of life in Virginia during the late 18th century, and a profile of one of this nation's most underappreciated Founders.

<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Ambler v. Wyld]]''
*''[[Aylett v. Aylett]]''
*''[[Bailey v. Teackle]]''
*''[[Beverley v. Rennolds]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Cadwallader v. Mason]]''
*''[[Cary v. Buxton]]''
*''[[Case upon the Statute for Distribution]]''
*''[[Cobs v. Mosby]]''
*''[[Cochran v. Street]]''
*''[[Cole v. Scott]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Lyon]]''
*''[[Dawson v. Winslow]]''
*''[[Devisme v. Martin]]''
*''[[Farley v. Shippen]]''
*''[[Farrar v. Jackson]]''
*''[[Field v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock]]''
*''[[Hamilton & Co. v. Urquhart]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Allen]]''
*''[[Hearne v. Roane]]''
*''[[Hill v. Gregory]]''
*''[[Hinde v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Kelsick]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Kuhn]]''
*''[[Hylton v. Hunter]]''
*''[[Jones v. White]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Donelson]]''
*''[[Maze v. Hamilton]]''
*''[[Nance v. Woodward]]''
*''[[Overstreet v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Overton v. Ross]]''
*''[[Page v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Hoomes]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Lomax]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Roane v. Innis]]''
*''[[Rose v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pines]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Richardson]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Turpin]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Williams v. Jacob]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Rucker]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Woods v. Macrae]]''
*''[[Yates v. Salle]]''
</div>

==Cases from Virginia Reports==
<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Alexander v. Morris]]''
*''[[Allen v. Minor]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Fox]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Gest]]''
*''[[Applebury v. Anthony]]''
*''[[Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas|The Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Chevallie|The Auditor v. Chevallie]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x|The Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x]]''
*''[[Austin's Admin v. Winston's Executrix]]''
*''[[Baird v. Bland]]''
*''[[Barnett & Co. v. Smith & Co.]]''
*''[[Barrett v. Floyd]]''
*''[[Beckwith v. Butler]]''
*''[[Bedford v. Hickman]]''
*''[[Bernard v. Hipkins]]''
*''[[Blane v. Proudfit]]''
*''[[Blane v. Smith]]''
*''[[Blanton v. Brackett]]''
*''[[Blunt v. Gee]]''
*''[[Branch v. Burnley]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Andrews]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Gaines]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Lee's heirs]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Morris]]''
*''[[Brewer v. Hastie & Co.]]''
*''[[Brown v. Brown]]''
*''[[Browne v. Turberville]]''
*''[[Buckner v. Smith]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock|Bullock v. Goodall]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Campbell v. Price]]''
*''[[Carter's Ex'or v. Currie]]''
*''[[Cary v. Macon]]''
*''[[Chandler's Executrix v. Hill]]''
*''[[Chapman's Adm'x v. Turner]]''
*''[[Chapmans v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Cheshire v. Atkinson]]''
*''[[Chichester's Ex'x v. Vass's Adm'r.]]''
*''[[Chisholm v. Starke]]''
*''[[Claiborne v. Henderson]]''
*''[[Clarke v. Conn]]''
*''[[Clay v. Williams]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Beaumarchais]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Bristow]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Colquhouns]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Ronald]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Walker's Exc'r]]''
*''[[Countz v. Geiger]]''
*''[[Coutt's Trustees v. Craig]]''
*''[[Coutts v. Greenhow]]''
*''[[Cowles v. Brown]]''
*''[[Cringan v. Nicolson's Exec'rs]]''
*''[[Croughton v. Duval]]''
*''[[Curry v. Burns]]''
*''[[Dabney v. Green]]''
*''[[Dalby v. Price]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Dorrington]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Harris]]''
*''[[Dangerfield v. Rootes]]''
*''[[Davenport v. Mason]]''
*''[[Deanes v. Scriba]]''
*''[[Deneale v. Morgan's Ex'ors]]''
*''[[Dunn v. Bray]]''
*''[[Duval v. Bibb]]''
*''[[Ellzey v. Lane's Executrix]]''
*''[[Engle v. Burns]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Tucker]]''
*''[[Fitzgerald v. Jones]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Foote]]''
*''[[Fleming v. Bolling]]''
*''[[Flemings v. Willis]]''
*''[[Fletcher v. Pollard]]''
*''[[Ford v. Gardner]]''
*''[[Foster v. Crenshaw's Exec'ors]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Franklin v. Wilkinson]]''
*''[[Freelands v. Royall]]''
*''[[Goodwin v. Miller]]''
*''[[Graham v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Granberry v. Granberry]]''
*''[[Grantland v. Wight]]''
*''[[Green v. Price]]''
*''[[Hackett v. Alcock]]''
*''[[Hadfield v. Jameson]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Harvey v. Borden]]''
*''[[Hawkins's Ex'ors v. Minor, Ex'or of Berkeley]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Hudson]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Lightfoot]]''
*''[[Hite's Exec. v. Paul's heirs]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Marquess]]''
*''[[Hook v. Ross]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Smock]]''
*''[[Hopkins v. Blane]]''
*''[[Hord v. Dishman]]''
*''[[Hudgins v. Wrights]]''
*''[[Hunter v. Hall]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Brown]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Buffington]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Jones v. Roberts]]''
*''[[Jones v. Tomlinson]]''
*''[[Jones v. Williams]]''
*''[[Latham v. Latham]]''
*''[[Lawrason v. Davenport]]''
*''[[Lee v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Lewis's Ex'or v. Bacon]]''
*''[[Lindsay v. Howerton]]''
*''[[Lipscomb's Adm. v. Winston]]''
*''[[Lomax v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Long v. Colston]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Ross, Shore & Co.]]''
*''[[Madison v. Vaughan]]''
*''[[Maupin v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Mayo v. Bentley]]''
*''[[M'Call v. Peachy]]''
*''[[M'Connico v. Curzen]]''
*''[[Meredith v. Johns]]''
*''[[Mills v. Bell]]''
*''[[Minnis v. Aylett]]''
*''[[M'Kim v. Fulton]]''
*''[[Moore's Executor v. Aylett's Executor]]''
*''[[Moring v. Lucas]]''
*''[[Morris v. Owen]]''
*''[[Morris v. Ross]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1795)]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1807)]]''
*''[[Mutual Assurance Co. v. Mahon]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Harwood]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Suddarth]]''
*''[[Nice v. Purcell]]''
*''[[Nicholas's Executors v. Tyler]]''
*''[[Norton v. Rose]]''
*''[[Page's Exec. v. Winston's Adm'r]]''
*''[[Payne v. Dudley]]''
*''[[Paynes v. Coles]]''
*''[[Pendleton's Exc'r v. Stewart]]''
*''[[Perkins v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Picket v. Dowdall]]''
*''[[Picket v. Morris]]''
*''[[Pleasants v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Cartwright]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Patterson's Adm.]]''
*''[[Pope v. Towles]]''
*''[[President & Professors & Masters of William & Mary Coll. v. Hodgson|The President and Professors and Masters of William & Mary College v. Hodgson]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1799)]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1804)]]''
*''[[Price v. Crump]]''
*''[[Price v. Strange]]''
*''[[Pryor v. Adams]]''
*''[[Quarrier v. Carter's Rep.]]''
*''[[Quesnel v. Woodlief]]''
*''[[Randolph v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Randolph's Ex'r v. Randolph's Ex'rs]]''
*''[[Richardson v. Baker]]''
*''[[Richardson's Ex'r v. Hunt]]''
*''[[Robert's Widow v. Stanton]]''
*''[[Robertson v. Campbell]]''
*''[[Rose v. Murchie]]''
*''[[Ross v. Colville & Co.]]''
*''[[Rowton v. Rowton]]''
*''[[Sallee v. Yates]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'r v. Osborne's Ex'r]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'rs v. Trents]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Shermer]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1800)]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1801)]]''
*''[[Smallwood v. Mercer]]''
*''[[Smith v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Smith v. Wallace]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Spottswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Stanard v. Brownlow]]''
*''[[Stannard v. Graves]]''
*''[[Stephens v. Cobun]]''
*''[[Stockton v. Cook]]''
*''[[Syme v. Johnston]]''
*''[[Tabb v. Archer]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro's Ex'rs v. Thornton]]''
*''[[Tarpley's Admin. v. Dobyns]]''
*''[[Taylor v. Stone]]''
*''[[Taylor's Admin. v. Nicolson]]''
*''[[Templeman v. Steptoe]]''
*''[[Thornton v. Corbin]]''
*''[[Tinsley v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard/Mackey v. Bell]]''
*''[[Towler v. Buchanans, Hastie & Co.]]''
*''[[Triplett v. Wilson]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Locket]]''
*''[[Turnpin v. Thomas]]''
*''[[Upshaw v. Upshaw]]''
*''[[Walcott v. Swan]]''
*''[[Walker v. Walke]]''
*''[[Wallace v. Taliaferro]]''
*''[[Ward v. Webber]]''
*''[[Westfall v. Singleton]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1795)]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1800)]]''
*''[[Wigglesworth v. Steers]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Keeling]]''
*''[[Winston v. Johnson's Exec.]]''
*''[[Wolcott v. Swan]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Barrett & Co.]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Payne]]''
*''[[Worsham v. M'Kenzie]]''
*''[[Wright v. Dawney]]''
*''[[Yancey v. Hopkins]]''
*''[[Yates v. Murdoch]]''
*''[[Yerby v. Yerby]]''
*''[[Young v. Price]]''
*''[[Young v. Skipwith]]''
</div>

==County court cases==

*''[[Warrington v. Jiggitts]]''

==Court of Appeals cases==
*''[[Commonwealth v. Caton]]''

==See also==
*''[[Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery|Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery]]''
*[[George Wythe and Slavery]]
*[[Land Disputes in Western Virginia]]
*[[Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall|The Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall]]
*[[Virginia Hyperinflation and Debt]]
*[[Women's Legal Rights in Wythe's Time]]

==References==
<references />

==Further reading==
*Bryson, W. Hamilton. "The Use of Roman Law in Virginia Courts." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 28 (1984): 135-146.
*Hoffman, Richard J. "Classics in the Courts of the United States, 1790-1800." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 55 (1978): 55-84.
*Holt, Wythe. "[http://www.law.ua.edu/pubs/lrarticles/Volume%2058/Issue%205/Holt.pdf George Wythe: Early Modern Judge.]" In ''Alabama Law Review'' 58, no. 5 (2007): 1009-1039.

==External links==
*[https://scvahistory.org/about/w/george-wythe-1779-1789/ George Wythe, August 30, 1779-March 5, 1789,] Virginia Appellate Court History.

[[Category: Aspects of Wythe's Life]]
[[Category: Cases]]

File:MunfordsReports1814V2Scott'sEx'rvOsborne'sEx'r.pdf

2018-05-07T19:03:59Z

Drbordley: "Scott's Ex'r v. Osborne's Ex'r" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1814. Category:Cases

"Scott's Ex'r v. Osborne's Ex'r" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1814. [[Category:Cases]]

File:CallsReports1854V3RossvColville&Co.pdf

2018-05-07T18:52:39Z

Drbordley: "Ross v. Colville & Co." from volume 3 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. Category:Cases

"Ross v. Colville & Co." from volume 3 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. [[Category:Cases]]

File:RobertsonvCampbell.pdf

2018-05-07T18:45:36Z

Drbordley: "Robertson v. Campbell" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. Category:Cases

"Robertson v. Campbell" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. [[Category:Cases]]

File:MunfordsReports1814V2Robert'sWidowvStanton.pdf

2018-05-07T18:38:07Z

Drbordley: "Robert's Widow v. Stanton" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1814. Category:Cases

"Robert's Widow v. Stanton" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1814. [[Category:Cases]]

File:MunfordsReports1814V2Richardson'sEx'rvHunt.pdf

2018-05-07T18:28:27Z

Drbordley: "Richardson's Ex'r v. Hunt" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1814. Category:Cases

"Richardson's Ex'r v. Hunt" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by William Munford. New York: I. Riley, 1814. [[Category:Cases]]

Wythe's Judicial Career

2018-05-07T18:24:53Z

Drbordley: /* Cases from Virginia Reports */

[[File:Postcard10_Detail.jpg|thumb|right|300px|<p>Detail from first day cover postcard for June 20, 1985, with cachet of [[George Wythe]].]]
Despite being one of the more obscure Founding Fathers, [[George Wythe]] played an important role in the early history of the United States. [http://www.wm.edu William & Mary's] -- and the United States' -- [[Wythe the Teacher|first law professor]], he was a man of great integrity who greatly influenced some of the fledgling country's most important figures with jurisprudential ideas that were often ahead of their time. Why do Americans not know more about this teacher, judge, delegate to the Second Continental Congress, and signer of the [[Declaration of Independence]]? One reason may be a lack of documentation. Thomas Jefferson said he had often seen Wythe toss the documents he created while working on a case into the fire upon the case's conclusion.<ref>Robert B. Kirtland, ''[[George Wythe: Lawyer, Revolutionary, Judge]]'' (New York: Garland Publishing, 1986), 5-6.</ref> The notes Wythe made as William & Mary's [[Professor of Law and Police]] scattered to places unknown long ago.<ref>For more information on the fate of Wythe's personal papers, see the Wythepedia article [[Wythe's Lost Papers]].</ref>

In 1778, Wythe was appointed to the newly created High Court of Chancery.<ref>Beverly Tucker describes the choice of Wythe as a judge, in ''The Principles of Pleading'' (Boston: Charles C. Little & James Brown, 1846), 56:<blockquote>...the people were not wholly insensible of the want of a Court of somewhat different character; and to supply that want was one of the objects, to which the framers of the new Constitution directed their attention. To do this, they established three Courts, for which sixteen Judges learned in the law were wanting. The difficulty was to find the men fit to fill these important posts. ''Integrity'' and ''talent'' were abundant, but a ''learned'' lawyer was indeed a ''rara avis.'' What motive had the lawyers had to acquire learning? With the exception of some few who had studied the profession abroad, and had not been long enough in Virginia to lose the memory of what they knew, in the loose practice prevailing here, there was but one man in the State who had any claims to the character. I speak of the venerable Chancellor Wythe, a man who differed from his contemporaries in this, because in his ordinary motives and modes of action he differed altogether from other men. Without ambition, without avarice, taking no pleasure in society, he was by nature and habit addicted to solitude, and his active mind found its only enjoyment in profound research. The languages of antiquity, the exact sciences, and the law, were the three studies which alone could be pursued with a reasonable hope of arriving at that certainty which his upright and truth-loving mind contemplated as the only object worthy of his labors. To these he devoted himself, and he became a profound lawyer for the same reason that he was a profound Greek scholar, astronomer and mathematician.</blockquote></ref> As a member of the Chancery Court, Wythe also heard appellate cases. An Act of the Assembly in 1779 required all three of the initial Chancery Court judges to serve ''ex officio'' on the Court of Appeals with judges from the Court of Admiralty and the General Court.<ref>Thomas Alonzo Dill, ''George Wythe: Teacher of Liberty'' (Williamsburg, Va.: Virginia Independence Bicentennial Commission, 1979), 40.</ref> When the Assembly reorganized the courts in 1788 and created a permanent Court of Appeals, Wythe remained as the sole chancellor with his decisions subject to review by the Court of Appeals.<ref>William Brockenbrough, [https://books.google.com/books?id=oTETAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Virginia Cases: Or, Decisions of the General Court of Virginia,''] Vol. 2 (Richmond, VA: Peter Cottom, 1826), xiii.</ref>

In 1780, Wythe — along with [[wikipedia:William Paca|William Paca]] of Maryland and [[wikipedia:Titus Hosmer|Titus Hosmer]] of Connecticut — was [[Samuel Huntington to Wythe et al., 2 February 1780|elected one of three judges]] to serve on the [[wikipedia:Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture|Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture]], a newly-established federal appeals court (pre-dating the U.S. Supreme Court by nearly a decade) to hear cases from all Courts of Admiralty. [[Wythe to Samuel Huntington, 21 February 1780|Wythe declined the appointment]], and [[wikipedia:Cyrus Griffin|Cyrus Griffin]] was chosen in his place.<ref>Hampton L. Carson, [https://books.google.com/books?id=brAOp7K8ukMC&pg=PA55 ''The Supreme Court of the United States: Its History''] (Philadelphia: A.R. Keller, 1892), 1:55-56.</ref>

Wythe's career as a judge may be the best-documented aspect of his life. We have multiple sources for Wythe's decisions, including decisions published by Wythe himself and decisions published in the ''Virginia Reports''. The latter include landmark Court of Appeals cases such as ''Commonwealth v. Caton''.

==Cases published by Wythe==
Wythe compiled a volume of some of his Chancery Court cases, now known as ''[[Wythe's Reports]]''.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]]'' (Richmond: Printed by Thomas Nicolson, 1795).</ref> Several decades after Wythe died, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Blake_Minor Benjamin Blake Minor] edited a second edition of the ''Reports'' that added decisions Wythe published separately.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery with Remarks upon Decrees by the Court of Appeals, Reversing Some of Those Decisions|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]],'' 2nd ed., ed. B.B. Minor (Richmond: J.W. Randolph, 1852).</ref>

The ''Reports'' contain cases that Wythe heard as Virginia's High Chancellor, the judge who sat on the commonwealth's High Court of Chancery, a court of equity. In the Anglo-American legal system, equity developed as an alternative set of remedies to the common law system; equity was supposed to provide a solution when the common law outcome would not provide proper justice. In the early days of the United States, many states had separate courts to hear equity cases. Equity cases usually involved property, contract, and inheritance disputes, so those are the cases the reader will find in ''Wythe's Reports''. Wythepedia has created pages for each of the decisions in the ''Reports'' summarizing the case and its background and explaining references to sources Wythe cited. We can think of ''Wythe's Reports'' as his version of a casebook, the textbooks that modern law students are familiar with. Wythe excerpts and summarizes the court's decisions, sometimes including subsequent appeals to other courts, then comments on them. Wythe hopes that by reading his commentaries on the courts' decisions, future lawyers and students of law will reach a better understanding of the law as it was in Virginia and how he thought it ''should'' be.

Wythe's ''Reports'' demands a lot from its readers. Wythe frequently cited or alluded to Ancient Greek and Latin works (often in their original language, with no English translation), as well as more recent classic authors such as Cervantes, Dante, and Shakespeare. He frequently used shorthand references and terms of art that lawyers of his era would understand, but which may baffle 21st-century readers. Wythe frequently left out information such as how the case arrived before him or facts that Wythe found irrelevant to the point he was trying to make. Often, if a Wythe decision was appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, that higher court's opinion would be a better source for the facts of the case.

Properly understanding Wythe's decisions also means knowing their historical context. Many of the cases Wythe decided were influenced by events that were familiar to educated people in his day, but are esoteric history to modern Americans. Wythe also believed that Roman law principles were sometimes superior to English legal precedent, and cautioned against blindly following England's caselaw. Wythe believed, as did many of his contemporaries, that as a new country, the United States might wish to follow European-style civil law principles rather than Anglo common law.<ref>Timothy G. Kearley, "From Rome to the Restatement", ''Law Library Journal'' 108(1) (Winter 2016): 60.</ref>

Another important piece of subtext lurking within ''Wythe's Reports'' is its author's long rivalry with [[Edmund Pendleton]], President of the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Wythe had arguably the most brilliant jurisprudential mind of his generation, and he was rarely defeated when he argued a case. The gregarious Pendleton, however, was a master litigator and one of the few people capable of defeating Wythe in court. As President of the Supreme Court, Pendleton reversed a substantial number of Wythe's decisions.

Wythepedia articles on the cases in ''Wythe's Reports'' summarize the case, and include notes and links to useful articles that can better explain the conflict and reasoning in the case. Wythepedia also includes articles that fill in the background behind a number of these decisions. ''Wythe's Reports'' can be a treatise on Virginia law and equity, a snapshot of life in Virginia during the late 18th century, and a profile of one of this nation's most underappreciated Founders.

<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Ambler v. Wyld]]''
*''[[Aylett v. Aylett]]''
*''[[Bailey v. Teackle]]''
*''[[Beverley v. Rennolds]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Cadwallader v. Mason]]''
*''[[Cary v. Buxton]]''
*''[[Case upon the Statute for Distribution]]''
*''[[Cobs v. Mosby]]''
*''[[Cochran v. Street]]''
*''[[Cole v. Scott]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Lyon]]''
*''[[Dawson v. Winslow]]''
*''[[Devisme v. Martin]]''
*''[[Farley v. Shippen]]''
*''[[Farrar v. Jackson]]''
*''[[Field v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock]]''
*''[[Hamilton & Co. v. Urquhart]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Allen]]''
*''[[Hearne v. Roane]]''
*''[[Hill v. Gregory]]''
*''[[Hinde v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Kelsick]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Kuhn]]''
*''[[Hylton v. Hunter]]''
*''[[Jones v. White]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Donelson]]''
*''[[Maze v. Hamilton]]''
*''[[Nance v. Woodward]]''
*''[[Overstreet v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Overton v. Ross]]''
*''[[Page v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Hoomes]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Lomax]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Roane v. Innis]]''
*''[[Rose v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pines]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Richardson]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Turpin]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Williams v. Jacob]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Rucker]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Woods v. Macrae]]''
*''[[Yates v. Salle]]''
</div>

==Cases from Virginia Reports==
<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Alexander v. Morris]]''
*''[[Allen v. Minor]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Fox]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Gest]]''
*''[[Applebury v. Anthony]]''
*''[[Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas|The Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Chevallie|The Auditor v. Chevallie]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x|The Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x]]''
*''[[Austin's Admin v. Winston's Executrix]]''
*''[[Baird v. Bland]]''
*''[[Barnett & Co. v. Smith & Co.]]''
*''[[Barrett v. Floyd]]''
*''[[Beckwith v. Butler]]''
*''[[Bedford v. Hickman]]''
*''[[Bernard v. Hipkins]]''
*''[[Blane v. Proudfit]]''
*''[[Blane v. Smith]]''
*''[[Blanton v. Brackett]]''
*''[[Blunt v. Gee]]''
*''[[Branch v. Burnley]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Andrews]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Gaines]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Lee's heirs]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Morris]]''
*''[[Brewer v. Hastie & Co.]]''
*''[[Brown v. Brown]]''
*''[[Browne v. Turberville]]''
*''[[Buckner v. Smith]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock|Bullock v. Goodall]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Campbell v. Price]]''
*''[[Carter's Ex'or v. Currie]]''
*''[[Cary v. Macon]]''
*''[[Chandler's Executrix v. Hill]]''
*''[[Chapman's Adm'x v. Turner]]''
*''[[Chapmans v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Cheshire v. Atkinson]]''
*''[[Chichester's Ex'x v. Vass's Adm'r.]]''
*''[[Chisholm v. Starke]]''
*''[[Claiborne v. Henderson]]''
*''[[Clarke v. Conn]]''
*''[[Clay v. Williams]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Beaumarchais]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Bristow]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Colquhouns]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Ronald]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Walker's Exc'r]]''
*''[[Countz v. Geiger]]''
*''[[Coutt's Trustees v. Craig]]''
*''[[Coutts v. Greenhow]]''
*''[[Cowles v. Brown]]''
*''[[Cringan v. Nicolson's Exec'rs]]''
*''[[Croughton v. Duval]]''
*''[[Curry v. Burns]]''
*''[[Dabney v. Green]]''
*''[[Dalby v. Price]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Dorrington]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Harris]]''
*''[[Dangerfield v. Rootes]]''
*''[[Davenport v. Mason]]''
*''[[Deanes v. Scriba]]''
*''[[Deneale v. Morgan's Ex'ors]]''
*''[[Dunn v. Bray]]''
*''[[Duval v. Bibb]]''
*''[[Ellzey v. Lane's Executrix]]''
*''[[Engle v. Burns]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Tucker]]''
*''[[Fitzgerald v. Jones]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Foote]]''
*''[[Fleming v. Bolling]]''
*''[[Flemings v. Willis]]''
*''[[Fletcher v. Pollard]]''
*''[[Ford v. Gardner]]''
*''[[Foster v. Crenshaw's Exec'ors]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Franklin v. Wilkinson]]''
*''[[Freelands v. Royall]]''
*''[[Goodwin v. Miller]]''
*''[[Graham v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Granberry v. Granberry]]''
*''[[Grantland v. Wight]]''
*''[[Green v. Price]]''
*''[[Hackett v. Alcock]]''
*''[[Hadfield v. Jameson]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Harvey v. Borden]]''
*''[[Hawkins's Ex'ors v. Minor, Ex'or of Berkeley]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Hudson]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Lightfoot]]''
*''[[Hite's Exec. v. Paul's heirs]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Marquess]]''
*''[[Hook v. Ross]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Smock]]''
*''[[Hopkins v. Blane]]''
*''[[Hord v. Dishman]]''
*''[[Hudgins v. Wrights]]''
*''[[Hunter v. Hall]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Brown]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Buffington]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Jones v. Roberts]]''
*''[[Jones v. Tomlinson]]''
*''[[Jones v. Williams]]''
*''[[Latham v. Latham]]''
*''[[Lawrason v. Davenport]]''
*''[[Lee v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Lewis's Ex'or v. Bacon]]''
*''[[Lindsay v. Howerton]]''
*''[[Lipscomb's Adm. v. Winston]]''
*''[[Lomax v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Long v. Colston]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Ross, Shore & Co.]]''
*''[[Madison v. Vaughan]]''
*''[[Maupin v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Mayo v. Bentley]]''
*''[[M'Call v. Peachy]]''
*''[[M'Connico v. Curzen]]''
*''[[Meredith v. Johns]]''
*''[[Mills v. Bell]]''
*''[[Minnis v. Aylett]]''
*''[[M'Kim v. Fulton]]''
*''[[Moore's Executor v. Aylett's Executor]]''
*''[[Moring v. Lucas]]''
*''[[Morris v. Owen]]''
*''[[Morris v. Ross]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1795)]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1807)]]''
*''[[Mutual Assurance Co. v. Mahon]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Harwood]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Suddarth]]''
*''[[Nice v. Purcell]]''
*''[[Nicholas's Executors v. Tyler]]''
*''[[Norton v. Rose]]''
*''[[Page's Exec. v. Winston's Adm'r]]''
*''[[Payne v. Dudley]]''
*''[[Paynes v. Coles]]''
*''[[Pendleton's Exc'r v. Stewart]]''
*''[[Perkins v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Picket v. Dowdall]]''
*''[[Picket v. Morris]]''
*''[[Pleasants v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Cartwright]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Patterson's Adm.]]''
*''[[Pope v. Towles]]''
*''[[President & Professors & Masters of William & Mary Coll. v. Hodgson|The President and Professors and Masters of William & Mary College v. Hodgson]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1799)]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1804)]]''
*''[[Price v. Crump]]''
*''[[Price v. Strange]]''
*''[[Pryor v. Adams]]''
*''[[Quarrier v. Carter's Rep.]]''
*''[[Quesnel v. Woodlief]]''
*''[[Randolph v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Randolph's Ex'r v. Randolph's Ex'rs]]''
*''[[Richardson v. Baker]]''
*''[[Richardson's Ex'r v. Hunt]]''
*''[[Robert's Widow v. Stanton]]''
*''[[Robertson v. Campbell]]''
*''[[Rose v. Murchie]]''
*''[[Ross v. Colville & Co.]]''
*''[[Rowton v. Rowton]]''
*''[[Sallee v. Yates]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'rs v. Osborne's Ex'r]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'rs v. Trents]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Shermer]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1800)]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1801)]]''
*''[[Smallwood v. Mercer]]''
*''[[Smith v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Smith v. Wallace]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Spottswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Stanard v. Brownlow]]''
*''[[Stannard v. Graves]]''
*''[[Stephens v. Cobun]]''
*''[[Stockton v. Cook]]''
*''[[Syme v. Johnston]]''
*''[[Tabb v. Archer]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro's Ex'rs v. Thornton]]''
*''[[Tarpley's Admin. v. Dobyns]]''
*''[[Taylor v. Stone]]''
*''[[Taylor's Admin. v. Nicolson]]''
*''[[Templeman v. Steptoe]]''
*''[[Thornton v. Corbin]]''
*''[[Tinsley v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard/Mackey v. Bell]]''
*''[[Towler v. Buchanans, Hastie & Co.]]''
*''[[Triplett v. Wilson]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Locket]]''
*''[[Turnpin v. Thomas]]''
*''[[Upshaw v. Upshaw]]''
*''[[Walcott v. Swan]]''
*''[[Walker v. Walke]]''
*''[[Wallace v. Taliaferro]]''
*''[[Ward v. Webber]]''
*''[[Westfall v. Singleton]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1795)]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1800)]]''
*''[[Wigglesworth v. Steers]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Keeling]]''
*''[[Winston v. Johnson's Exec.]]''
*''[[Wolcott v. Swan]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Barrett & Co.]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Payne]]''
*''[[Worsham v. M'Kenzie]]''
*''[[Wright v. Dawney]]''
*''[[Yancey v. Hopkins]]''
*''[[Yates v. Murdoch]]''
*''[[Yerby v. Yerby]]''
*''[[Young v. Price]]''
*''[[Young v. Skipwith]]''
</div>

==County court cases==

*''[[Warrington v. Jiggitts]]''

==Court of Appeals cases==
*''[[Commonwealth v. Caton]]''

==See also==
*''[[Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery|Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery]]''
*[[George Wythe and Slavery]]
*[[Land Disputes in Western Virginia]]
*[[Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall|The Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall]]
*[[Virginia Hyperinflation and Debt]]
*[[Women's Legal Rights in Wythe's Time]]

==References==
<references />

==Further reading==
*Bryson, W. Hamilton. "The Use of Roman Law in Virginia Courts." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 28 (1984): 135-146.
*Hoffman, Richard J. "Classics in the Courts of the United States, 1790-1800." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 55 (1978): 55-84.
*Holt, Wythe. "[http://www.law.ua.edu/pubs/lrarticles/Volume%2058/Issue%205/Holt.pdf George Wythe: Early Modern Judge.]" In ''Alabama Law Review'' 58, no. 5 (2007): 1009-1039.

==External links==
*[https://scvahistory.org/about/w/george-wythe-1779-1789/ George Wythe, August 30, 1779-March 5, 1789,] Virginia Appellate Court History.

[[Category: Aspects of Wythe's Life]]
[[Category: Cases]]

Wythe's Judicial Career

2018-05-07T18:16:03Z

Drbordley: /* Cases from Virginia Reports */

[[File:Postcard10_Detail.jpg|thumb|right|300px|<p>Detail from first day cover postcard for June 20, 1985, with cachet of [[George Wythe]].]]
Despite being one of the more obscure Founding Fathers, [[George Wythe]] played an important role in the early history of the United States. [http://www.wm.edu William & Mary's] -- and the United States' -- [[Wythe the Teacher|first law professor]], he was a man of great integrity who greatly influenced some of the fledgling country's most important figures with jurisprudential ideas that were often ahead of their time. Why do Americans not know more about this teacher, judge, delegate to the Second Continental Congress, and signer of the [[Declaration of Independence]]? One reason may be a lack of documentation. Thomas Jefferson said he had often seen Wythe toss the documents he created while working on a case into the fire upon the case's conclusion.<ref>Robert B. Kirtland, ''[[George Wythe: Lawyer, Revolutionary, Judge]]'' (New York: Garland Publishing, 1986), 5-6.</ref> The notes Wythe made as William & Mary's [[Professor of Law and Police]] scattered to places unknown long ago.<ref>For more information on the fate of Wythe's personal papers, see the Wythepedia article [[Wythe's Lost Papers]].</ref>

In 1778, Wythe was appointed to the newly created High Court of Chancery.<ref>Beverly Tucker describes the choice of Wythe as a judge, in ''The Principles of Pleading'' (Boston: Charles C. Little & James Brown, 1846), 56:<blockquote>...the people were not wholly insensible of the want of a Court of somewhat different character; and to supply that want was one of the objects, to which the framers of the new Constitution directed their attention. To do this, they established three Courts, for which sixteen Judges learned in the law were wanting. The difficulty was to find the men fit to fill these important posts. ''Integrity'' and ''talent'' were abundant, but a ''learned'' lawyer was indeed a ''rara avis.'' What motive had the lawyers had to acquire learning? With the exception of some few who had studied the profession abroad, and had not been long enough in Virginia to lose the memory of what they knew, in the loose practice prevailing here, there was but one man in the State who had any claims to the character. I speak of the venerable Chancellor Wythe, a man who differed from his contemporaries in this, because in his ordinary motives and modes of action he differed altogether from other men. Without ambition, without avarice, taking no pleasure in society, he was by nature and habit addicted to solitude, and his active mind found its only enjoyment in profound research. The languages of antiquity, the exact sciences, and the law, were the three studies which alone could be pursued with a reasonable hope of arriving at that certainty which his upright and truth-loving mind contemplated as the only object worthy of his labors. To these he devoted himself, and he became a profound lawyer for the same reason that he was a profound Greek scholar, astronomer and mathematician.</blockquote></ref> As a member of the Chancery Court, Wythe also heard appellate cases. An Act of the Assembly in 1779 required all three of the initial Chancery Court judges to serve ''ex officio'' on the Court of Appeals with judges from the Court of Admiralty and the General Court.<ref>Thomas Alonzo Dill, ''George Wythe: Teacher of Liberty'' (Williamsburg, Va.: Virginia Independence Bicentennial Commission, 1979), 40.</ref> When the Assembly reorganized the courts in 1788 and created a permanent Court of Appeals, Wythe remained as the sole chancellor with his decisions subject to review by the Court of Appeals.<ref>William Brockenbrough, [https://books.google.com/books?id=oTETAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR13 ''Virginia Cases: Or, Decisions of the General Court of Virginia,''] Vol. 2 (Richmond, VA: Peter Cottom, 1826), xiii.</ref>

In 1780, Wythe — along with [[wikipedia:William Paca|William Paca]] of Maryland and [[wikipedia:Titus Hosmer|Titus Hosmer]] of Connecticut — was [[Samuel Huntington to Wythe et al., 2 February 1780|elected one of three judges]] to serve on the [[wikipedia:Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture|Court of Appeals in the Cases of Capture]], a newly-established federal appeals court (pre-dating the U.S. Supreme Court by nearly a decade) to hear cases from all Courts of Admiralty. [[Wythe to Samuel Huntington, 21 February 1780|Wythe declined the appointment]], and [[wikipedia:Cyrus Griffin|Cyrus Griffin]] was chosen in his place.<ref>Hampton L. Carson, [https://books.google.com/books?id=brAOp7K8ukMC&pg=PA55 ''The Supreme Court of the United States: Its History''] (Philadelphia: A.R. Keller, 1892), 1:55-56.</ref>

Wythe's career as a judge may be the best-documented aspect of his life. We have multiple sources for Wythe's decisions, including decisions published by Wythe himself and decisions published in the ''Virginia Reports''. The latter include landmark Court of Appeals cases such as ''Commonwealth v. Caton''.

==Cases published by Wythe==
Wythe compiled a volume of some of his Chancery Court cases, now known as ''[[Wythe's Reports]]''.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]]'' (Richmond: Printed by Thomas Nicolson, 1795).</ref> Several decades after Wythe died, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Blake_Minor Benjamin Blake Minor] edited a second edition of the ''Reports'' that added decisions Wythe published separately.<ref>George Wythe, ''[[Wythe's Reports|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery with Remarks upon Decrees by the Court of Appeals, Reversing Some of Those Decisions|Decisions of Cases in Virginia by the High Court of Chancery]],'' 2nd ed., ed. B.B. Minor (Richmond: J.W. Randolph, 1852).</ref>

The ''Reports'' contain cases that Wythe heard as Virginia's High Chancellor, the judge who sat on the commonwealth's High Court of Chancery, a court of equity. In the Anglo-American legal system, equity developed as an alternative set of remedies to the common law system; equity was supposed to provide a solution when the common law outcome would not provide proper justice. In the early days of the United States, many states had separate courts to hear equity cases. Equity cases usually involved property, contract, and inheritance disputes, so those are the cases the reader will find in ''Wythe's Reports''. Wythepedia has created pages for each of the decisions in the ''Reports'' summarizing the case and its background and explaining references to sources Wythe cited. We can think of ''Wythe's Reports'' as his version of a casebook, the textbooks that modern law students are familiar with. Wythe excerpts and summarizes the court's decisions, sometimes including subsequent appeals to other courts, then comments on them. Wythe hopes that by reading his commentaries on the courts' decisions, future lawyers and students of law will reach a better understanding of the law as it was in Virginia and how he thought it ''should'' be.

Wythe's ''Reports'' demands a lot from its readers. Wythe frequently cited or alluded to Ancient Greek and Latin works (often in their original language, with no English translation), as well as more recent classic authors such as Cervantes, Dante, and Shakespeare. He frequently used shorthand references and terms of art that lawyers of his era would understand, but which may baffle 21st-century readers. Wythe frequently left out information such as how the case arrived before him or facts that Wythe found irrelevant to the point he was trying to make. Often, if a Wythe decision was appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, that higher court's opinion would be a better source for the facts of the case.

Properly understanding Wythe's decisions also means knowing their historical context. Many of the cases Wythe decided were influenced by events that were familiar to educated people in his day, but are esoteric history to modern Americans. Wythe also believed that Roman law principles were sometimes superior to English legal precedent, and cautioned against blindly following England's caselaw. Wythe believed, as did many of his contemporaries, that as a new country, the United States might wish to follow European-style civil law principles rather than Anglo common law.<ref>Timothy G. Kearley, "From Rome to the Restatement", ''Law Library Journal'' 108(1) (Winter 2016): 60.</ref>

Another important piece of subtext lurking within ''Wythe's Reports'' is its author's long rivalry with [[Edmund Pendleton]], President of the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Wythe had arguably the most brilliant jurisprudential mind of his generation, and he was rarely defeated when he argued a case. The gregarious Pendleton, however, was a master litigator and one of the few people capable of defeating Wythe in court. As President of the Supreme Court, Pendleton reversed a substantial number of Wythe's decisions.

Wythepedia articles on the cases in ''Wythe's Reports'' summarize the case, and include notes and links to useful articles that can better explain the conflict and reasoning in the case. Wythepedia also includes articles that fill in the background behind a number of these decisions. ''Wythe's Reports'' can be a treatise on Virginia law and equity, a snapshot of life in Virginia during the late 18th century, and a profile of one of this nation's most underappreciated Founders.

<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Ambler v. Wyld]]''
*''[[Aylett v. Aylett]]''
*''[[Bailey v. Teackle]]''
*''[[Beverley v. Rennolds]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Cadwallader v. Mason]]''
*''[[Cary v. Buxton]]''
*''[[Case upon the Statute for Distribution]]''
*''[[Cobs v. Mosby]]''
*''[[Cochran v. Street]]''
*''[[Cole v. Scott]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Lyon]]''
*''[[Dawson v. Winslow]]''
*''[[Devisme v. Martin]]''
*''[[Farley v. Shippen]]''
*''[[Farrar v. Jackson]]''
*''[[Field v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock]]''
*''[[Hamilton & Co. v. Urquhart]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Allen]]''
*''[[Hearne v. Roane]]''
*''[[Hill v. Gregory]]''
*''[[Hinde v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Kelsick]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Kuhn]]''
*''[[Hylton v. Hunter]]''
*''[[Jones v. White]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Donelson]]''
*''[[Maze v. Hamilton]]''
*''[[Nance v. Woodward]]''
*''[[Overstreet v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Overton v. Ross]]''
*''[[Page v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Hoomes]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Lomax]]''
*''[[Pendleton v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Roane v. Innis]]''
*''[[Rose v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pines]]''
*''[[Ross v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Richardson]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Turpin]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Williams v. Jacob]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Rucker]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Woods v. Macrae]]''
*''[[Yates v. Salle]]''
</div>

==Cases from Virginia Reports==
<div style="column-count:5;-moz-column-count:5;-webkit-column-count:5">
*''[[Alexander v. Morris]]''
*''[[Allen v. Minor]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Fox]]''
*''[[Anderson v. Gest]]''
*''[[Applebury v. Anthony]]''
*''[[Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas|The Auditor of Public Accounts v. Nicholas]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Chevallie|The Auditor v. Chevallie]]''
*''[[Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x|The Auditor v. Johnson's Exec'x]]''
*''[[Austin's Admin v. Winston's Executrix]]''
*''[[Baird v. Bland]]''
*''[[Barnett & Co. v. Smith & Co.]]''
*''[[Barrett v. Floyd]]''
*''[[Beckwith v. Butler]]''
*''[[Bedford v. Hickman]]''
*''[[Bernard v. Hipkins]]''
*''[[Blane v. Proudfit]]''
*''[[Blane v. Smith]]''
*''[[Blanton v. Brackett]]''
*''[[Blunt v. Gee]]''
*''[[Branch v. Burnley]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Andrews]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Gaines]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Lee's heirs]]''
*''[[Braxton v. Morris]]''
*''[[Brewer v. Hastie & Co.]]''
*''[[Brown v. Brown]]''
*''[[Browne v. Turberville]]''
*''[[Buckner v. Smith]]''
*''[[Goodall v. Bullock|Bullock v. Goodall]]''
*''[[Burnsides v. Reid]]''
*''[[Campbell v. Price]]''
*''[[Carter's Ex'or v. Currie]]''
*''[[Cary v. Macon]]''
*''[[Chandler's Executrix v. Hill]]''
*''[[Chapman's Adm'x v. Turner]]''
*''[[Chapmans v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Cheshire v. Atkinson]]''
*''[[Chichester's Ex'x v. Vass's Adm'r.]]''
*''[[Chisholm v. Starke]]''
*''[[Claiborne v. Henderson]]''
*''[[Clarke v. Conn]]''
*''[[Clay v. Williams]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Beaumarchais]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Bristow]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Colquhouns]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Ronald]]''
*''[[Commonwealth v. Walker's Exc'r]]''
*''[[Countz v. Geiger]]''
*''[[Coutt's Trustees v. Craig]]''
*''[[Coutts v. Greenhow]]''
*''[[Cowles v. Brown]]''
*''[[Cringan v. Nicolson's Exec'rs]]''
*''[[Croughton v. Duval]]''
*''[[Curry v. Burns]]''
*''[[Dabney v. Green]]''
*''[[Dalby v. Price]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Dorrington]]''
*''[[Dandridge v. Harris]]''
*''[[Dangerfield v. Rootes]]''
*''[[Davenport v. Mason]]''
*''[[Deanes v. Scriba]]''
*''[[Deneale v. Morgan's Ex'ors]]''
*''[[Dunn v. Bray]]''
*''[[Duval v. Bibb]]''
*''[[Ellzey v. Lane's Executrix]]''
*''[[Engle v. Burns]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Eppes v. Tucker]]''
*''[[Fitzgerald v. Jones]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Fitzhugh v. Foote]]''
*''[[Fleming v. Bolling]]''
*''[[Flemings v. Willis]]''
*''[[Fletcher v. Pollard]]''
*''[[Ford v. Gardner]]''
*''[[Foster v. Crenshaw's Exec'ors]]''
*''[[Fowler v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Franklin v. Wilkinson]]''
*''[[Freelands v. Royall]]''
*''[[Goodwin v. Miller]]''
*''[[Graham v. Woodson]]''
*''[[Granberry v. Granberry]]''
*''[[Grantland v. Wight]]''
*''[[Green v. Price]]''
*''[[Hackett v. Alcock]]''
*''[[Hadfield v. Jameson]]''
*''[[Harrison v. Harrison]]''
*''[[Harvey v. Borden]]''
*''[[Hawkins's Ex'ors v. Minor, Ex'or of Berkeley]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Hudson]]''
*''[[Henderson v. Lightfoot]]''
*''[[Hite's Exec. v. Paul's heirs]]''
*''[[Hooe v. Marquess]]''
*''[[Hook v. Ross]]''
*''[[Hoomes v. Smock]]''
*''[[Hopkins v. Blane]]''
*''[[Hord v. Dishman]]''
*''[[Hudgins v. Wrights]]''
*''[[Hunter v. Hall]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Brown]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Buffington]]''
*''[[Johnson v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Jones v. Roberts]]''
*''[[Jones v. Tomlinson]]''
*''[[Jones v. Williams]]''
*''[[Latham v. Latham]]''
*''[[Lawrason v. Davenport]]''
*''[[Lee v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Lewis's Ex'or v. Bacon]]''
*''[[Lindsay v. Howerton]]''
*''[[Lipscomb's Adm. v. Winston]]''
*''[[Lomax v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Long v. Colston]]''
*''[[Love v. Braxton]]''
*''[[Love v. Ross, Shore & Co.]]''
*''[[Madison v. Vaughan]]''
*''[[Maupin v. Whiting]]''
*''[[Mayo v. Bentley]]''
*''[[M'Call v. Peachy]]''
*''[[M'Connico v. Curzen]]''
*''[[Meredith v. Johns]]''
*''[[Mills v. Bell]]''
*''[[Minnis v. Aylett]]''
*''[[M'Kim v. Fulton]]''
*''[[Moore's Executor v. Aylett's Executor]]''
*''[[Moring v. Lucas]]''
*''[[Morris v. Owen]]''
*''[[Morris v. Ross]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1795)]]''
*''[[M'Rae v. Woods (1807)]]''
*''[[Mutual Assurance Co. v. Mahon]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Harwood]]''
*''[[Nelson v. Suddarth]]''
*''[[Nice v. Purcell]]''
*''[[Nicholas's Executors v. Tyler]]''
*''[[Norton v. Rose]]''
*''[[Page's Exec. v. Winston's Adm'r]]''
*''[[Payne v. Dudley]]''
*''[[Paynes v. Coles]]''
*''[[Pendleton's Exc'r v. Stewart]]''
*''[[Perkins v. Saunders]]''
*''[[Picket v. Dowdall]]''
*''[[Picket v. Morris]]''
*''[[Pleasants v. Pleasants]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Cartwright]]''
*''[[Pollard v. Patterson's Adm.]]''
*''[[Pope v. Towles]]''
*''[[President & Professors & Masters of William & Mary Coll. v. Hodgson|The President and Professors and Masters of William & Mary College v. Hodgson]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1799)]]''
*''[[Price v. Campbell (1804)]]''
*''[[Price v. Crump]]''
*''[[Price v. Strange]]''
*''[[Pryor v. Adams]]''
*''[[Quarrier v. Carter's Rep.]]''
*''[[Quesnel v. Woodlief]]''
*''[[Randolph v. Randolph]]''
*''[[Randolph's Exc'r v. Randolph's Exc'rs]]''
*''[[Richardson v. Baker]]''
*''[[Richardson's Exec v. Hunt]]''
*''[[Robert's Widow v. Stanton]]''
*''[[Robertson v. Campbell]]''
*''[[Rose v. Murchie]]''
*''[[Ross v. Colville & Co.]]''
*''[[Rowton v. Rowton]]''
*''[[Sallee v. Yates]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'ors v. Osborne's Exec'r]]''
*''[[Scott's Ex'ors v. Trents]]''
*''[[Shermer v. Shermer]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1800)]]''
*''[[Skipwith v. Clinch (1801)]]''
*''[[Smallwood v. Mercer]]''
*''[[Smith v. Chapman]]''
*''[[Smith v. Wallace]]''
*''[[Southall v. M'Keand]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Spotswood v. Pendleton]]''
*''[[Spottswood v. Dandridge]]''
*''[[Stanard v. Brownlow]]''
*''[[Stannard v. Graves]]''
*''[[Stephens v. Cobun]]''
*''[[Stockton v. Cook]]''
*''[[Syme v. Johnston]]''
*''[[Tabb v. Archer]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro v. Minor]]''
*''[[Taliaferro's Ex'ors v. Thornton]]''
*''[[Tarpley's Admin. v. Dobyns]]''
*''[[Taylor v. Stone]]''
*''[[Taylor's Admin. v. Nicolson]]''
*''[[Templeman v. Steptoe]]''
*''[[Thornton v. Corbin]]''
*''[[Tinsley v. Anderson]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard]]''
*''[[Tomlinson v. Dillard/Mackey v. Bell]]''
*''[[Towler v. Buchanans, Hastie & Co.]]''
*''[[Triplett v. Wilson]]''
*''[[Turpin v. Locket]]''
*''[[Turnpin v. Thomas]]''
*''[[Upshaw v. Upshaw]]''
*''[[Walcott v. Swan]]''
*''[[Walker v. Walke]]''
*''[[Wallace v. Taliaferro]]''
*''[[Ward v. Webber]]''
*''[[Westfall v. Singleton]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1795)]]''
*''[[White v. Atkinson (1800)]]''
*''[[Wigglesworth v. Steers]]''
*''[[Wilkins v. Taylor]]''
*''[[Wilson v. Keeling]]''
*''[[Winston v. Johnson's Exec.]]''
*''[[Wolcott v. Swan]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Barrett & Co.]]''
*''[[Woodson v. Payne]]''
*''[[Worsham v. M'Kenzie]]''
*''[[Wright v. Dawney]]''
*''[[Yancey v. Hopkins]]''
*''[[Yates v. Murdoch]]''
*''[[Yerby v. Yerby]]''
*''[[Young v. Price]]''
*''[[Young v. Skipwith]]''
</div>

==County court cases==

*''[[Warrington v. Jiggitts]]''

==Court of Appeals cases==
*''[[Commonwealth v. Caton]]''

==See also==
*''[[Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery|Decisions of Cases in Virginia, by the High Court of Chancery]]''
*[[George Wythe and Slavery]]
*[[Land Disputes in Western Virginia]]
*[[Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall|The Teacher of Jefferson and Marshall]]
*[[Virginia Hyperinflation and Debt]]
*[[Women's Legal Rights in Wythe's Time]]

==References==
<references />

==Further reading==
*Bryson, W. Hamilton. "The Use of Roman Law in Virginia Courts." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 28 (1984): 135-146.
*Hoffman, Richard J. "Classics in the Courts of the United States, 1790-1800." In ''American Journal of Legal History'' 55 (1978): 55-84.
*Holt, Wythe. "[http://www.law.ua.edu/pubs/lrarticles/Volume%2058/Issue%205/Holt.pdf George Wythe: Early Modern Judge.]" In ''Alabama Law Review'' 58, no. 5 (2007): 1009-1039.

==External links==
*[https://scvahistory.org/about/w/george-wythe-1779-1789/ George Wythe, August 30, 1779-March 5, 1789,] Virginia Appellate Court History.

[[Category: Aspects of Wythe's Life]]
[[Category: Cases]]

File:Hening&MunfordsReports1809V1Randolph'sEx'rvRandolph'sEx'rs.pdf

2018-05-07T18:14:05Z

Drbordley: "Randolph's Ex'r v. Randolph's Ex'rs" from volume 1 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Ric...

"Randolph's Ex'r v. Randolph's Ex'rs" from volume 1 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice, Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District'', by William Hening and William Munford. Flatbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809. [[Category:Cases]]

File:CallsReports1833V5PricevCampbell(1804).pdf

2018-05-07T17:57:56Z

Drbordley: "Price v. Campbell" from volume 5 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Decided in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. Richmond: R. I. Smith, 1833. Category:Cases

"Price v. Campbell" from volume 5 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Decided in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. Richmond: R. I. Smith, 1833. [[Category:Cases]]

File:CallsReports1854V2PricevCampbell.pdf

2018-05-07T17:52:01Z

Drbordley: "Price v. Campbell" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. Category:Cases

"Price v. Campbell" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. 3rd ed., ed. Lucian Minor. Richmond: A. Morris, 1854. [[Category:Cases]]

File:Hening&MunfordsReport1809V2President&Professors&MastersofWilliam&MaryCollvHodgson.pdf

2018-05-07T17:32:16Z

Drbordley: "President & Professors & Masters of William & Mary Coll. v. Hodgson" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice Decided by the Superi...

"President & Professors & Masters of William & Mary Coll. v. Hodgson" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia: With Select Cases, Relating Chiefly to Points of Practice Decided by the Superior Court of Chancery for the Richmond District'', by William Hening and William Munford. Flashbush (N.Y.): I. Riley, 1809. [[Category:Cases]]

File:WashingtonsReports1799V2PicketvMorris.pdf

2018-05-07T17:19:37Z

Drbordley: "Picket v. Morris" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Bushrod Washington. Richmond: T. Nicolson, 1799. Category:Cases

"Picket v. Morris" from volume 2 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Bushrod Washington. Richmond: T. Nicolson, 1799. [[Category:Cases]]

File:CallsReports1854V1Pendleton'sEx'rvStewart.pdf

2018-05-07T17:08:42Z

Drbordley: Drbordley uploaded a new version of "File:CallsReports1854V1Pendleton'sEx'rvStewart.pdf"

"Pendleton's Ex'r v. Stewart" from volume 5 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Decided in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. Richmond: R. I. Smith, 1833. [[Category:Cases]]

File:CallsReports1854V1Pendleton'sEx'rvStewart.pdf

2018-05-07T17:06:26Z

Drbordley:

"Pendleton's Ex'r v. Stewart" from volume 5 of ''Reports of Cases Argued and Decided in the Court of Appeals of Virginia'', by Daniel Call. Richmond: R. I. Smith, 1833. [[Category:Cases]]