The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Bethel Investment Co. v. City of Hampton
No. 060043Supreme Court of Virginia
060043 Bethel Investment Co. v. City of Hampton 11/03/2006 In an inverse condemnation and property damage action, the defendant city failed to carry its burden of proof on affirmative defenses based on Code § …
The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.The activity
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The source
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
060043 Bethel Investment Co. v. City of Hampton 11/03/2006 In an inverse condemnation and property damage action, the defendant c…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- November 3, 2006
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Official docket
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
Docket entry
060043 Bethel Investment Co. v. City of Hampton 11/03/2006 In an inverse condemnation and property damage action, the defendant city failed to carry its burden of proof on affirmative defenses based on Code § 8.01-222 and the applicable statutes of limitations, and the trial court erred in failing to accord plaintiff a jury hearing on the issue of when its claims accrued and in ruling that its claims were barred. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for trial, but on remand, defendant is not entitled to relitigate its claim that the plaintiff's claims accrued more than five years prior to the filing of the motion for judgment.
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
ReversedRemanded
The court's record, as written
060043 Bethel Investment Co. v. City of Hampton 11/03/2006 In an inverse condemnation and property damage action, the defendant city failed to carry its burden of proof on affirmative defenses based on Code § 8.01-222 and the applicable statutes of limitations, and the trial court erred in failing to accord plaintiff a jury hearing on the issue of when its claims accrued and in ruling that its claims were barred. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for trial, but on remand, defendant is not entitled to relitigate its claim that the plaintiff's claims accrued more than five years prior to the filing of the motion for judgment.
Outcome words in this text: reversed, remanded.
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
Documents and links