The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
Ott v. L&J Holdings
070228 Ott v. L&J Holdings 01/11/2008 In a declaratory suit addressing whether a wife's execution of a deed should be set aside as exceeding her authority under a power of attorney, the circuit court did not e…
The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
070228 Ott v. L&J Holdings 01/11/2008 In a declaratory suit addressing whether a wife's execution of a deed should be set aside a…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- January 11, 2008
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
070228 Ott v. L&J Holdings 01/11/2008 In a declaratory suit addressing whether a wife's execution of a deed should be set aside as exceeding her authority under a power of attorney, the circuit court did not err in admitting parol evidence. Credible evidence supported the findings that the deed was not a deed of gift, that it was given for a valuable consideration without donative intent, that the transfer was undertaken for legitimate business reasons, and that both spouses received benefits commensurate with their respective property interests without any self-dealing by the wife. The transaction was therefore within the powers granted by the power of attorney. The judgment is affirmed.
Open court document ↗Rulings in this case over time
Courts at different levels and stages can reach different results in the same case. Each entry is the court's own record; read it before drawing a conclusion.
1 entry, oldest first.
· Supreme Court of Virginia
AffirmedGranted
The court's record, as written
070228 Ott v. L&J Holdings 01/11/2008 In a declaratory suit addressing whether a wife's execution of a deed should be set aside as exceeding her authority under a power of attorney, the circuit court did not err in admitting parol evidence. Credible evidence supported the findings that the deed was not a deed of gift, that it was given for a valuable consideration without donative intent, that the transfer was undertaken for legitimate business reasons, and that both spouses received benefits commensurate with their respective property interests without any self-dealing by the wife. The transaction was therefore within the powers granted by the power of attorney. The judgment is affirmed.
Outcome words in this text: granted, affirmed.
Method: an entry is marked with an outcome only when its own text contains the outcome word, and the word is shown beside it. Orders, opinions and judgments whose text does not say are marked Other. Party filings, notices and routine procedural orders (appearances, extra pages, time extensions, scheduling) are not listed. No link between this case and any other case is recorded in our data, so only this case's own record is shown. Open the court's docket
