The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Barnett v. Kite
No. 051091Supreme Court of Virginia
051091 Barnett v. Kite 01/13/2006 In a personal injury action where plaintiff alleged that venue was proper due to defendant's status as the majority shareholder of a closely-held corporation regularly conduct…
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.
051091 Barnett v. Kite 01/13/2006 In a personal injury action where plaintiff alleged that venue was proper due to defendant's st…
- 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.
Official docket
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
Docket entry
051091 Barnett v. Kite 01/13/2006 In a personal injury action where plaintiff alleged that venue was proper due to defendant's status as the majority shareholder of a closely-held corporation regularly conducting business within the chosen forum, the circuit court erred in overruling defendant's objection to venue. The corporation was not shown to be the defendant's alter ego, and the evidence failed to establish that defendant personally conducted business on a regular basis in the chosen forum sufficient to permit an action against him in his individual capacity to proceed there. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded with instructions.
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
051091 Barnett v. Kite 01/13/2006 In a personal injury action where plaintiff alleged that venue was proper due to defendant's status as the majority shareholder of a closely-held corporation regularly conducting business within the chosen forum, the circuit court erred in overruling defendant's objection to venue. The corporation was not shown to be the defendant's alter ego, and the evidence failed to establish that defendant personally conducted business on a regular basis in the chosen forum sufficient to permit an action against him in his individual capacity to proceed there. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded with instructions.
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