Recent Virginia Case Updates
The Supreme Court of Virginia held that a deed’s legal description referring to a boundary road, includes title to the center line of the road, unless a contrary intent is shown. A description of the square footage of the property that excluded the area of the road did not show a contrary intent, because square footage is the least certain mode of describing land, which must yield to a description by boundaries and distances.
The Supreme Court of Virginia holds that Virginia law does not permit a court to modify a confessed judgment over the objection of the creditor, absent a trial.
Supreme Court of Virginia clarifies the jurisdiction and power of the Commissioner of Accounts, explaining that “[a] commissioner’s authority to assist the circuit court with the settlement of estates is simply an extension of the circuit court’s subject matter jurisdiction to administer estates.”
The Supreme Court of Virginia determined that an easement by necessity could be modified as “reasonably necessary” to benefit a landlocked parcel, so long as it did not unreasonably burden the underlying property, i.e., the servient estate. The Court held that as a matter of law, the trial court had the authority to grant the owner of the landlocked parcel the right to widen the established easement without the servient owner's consent.