The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
Hubbard v. Dresser, Inc.
050544 Hubbard v. Dresser, Inc. 01/13/2006 In a case alleging breaches of express and implied warranties in the sale of petroleum dispensing equipment, it was error to sustain a demurrer against a pleading whi…
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.
050544 Hubbard v. Dresser, Inc. 01/13/2006 In a case alleging breaches of express and implied warranties in the sale of petroleum…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- January 13, 2006
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.
050544 Hubbard v. Dresser, Inc. 01/13/2006 In a case alleging breaches of express and implied warranties in the sale of petroleum dispensing equipment, it was error to sustain a demurrer against a pleading which alleged an express warranty by the defendant, rather than merely stating the legal bases upon which such a warranty might have been created. The trial court further erred in sustaining a demurrer to a count pleading violation of the implied warranty of merchantability, because it is not necessary to plead with specificity the specific trade or industry standard for merchantability in order to withstand a demurrer. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded.
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
050544 Hubbard v. Dresser, Inc. 01/13/2006 In a case alleging breaches of express and implied warranties in the sale of petroleum dispensing equipment, it was error to sustain a demurrer against a pleading which alleged an express warranty by the defendant, rather than merely stating the legal bases upon which such a warranty might have been created. The trial court further erred in sustaining a demurrer to a count pleading violation of the implied warranty of merchantability, because it is not necessary to plead with specificity the specific trade or industry standard for merchantability in order to withstand a demurrer. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded.
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
