The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
Bentley Funding Group v. SK&R Group
041386 Bentley Funding Group v. SK&R Group 03/03/2005 In a dispute over ownership of cash erosion control escrow deposits, the trial court erred in finding that a development company's failure to list the escr…
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.
041386 Bentley Funding Group v. SK&R Group 03/03/2005 In a dispute over ownership of cash erosion control escrow deposits, the tr…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- March 3, 2005
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.
041386 Bentley Funding Group v. SK&R Group 03/03/2005 In a dispute over ownership of cash erosion control escrow deposits, the trial court erred in finding that a development company's failure to list the escrows as assets in bankruptcy filings precluded its ownership claim, in determining that a contract conveying the property to a new purchaser transferred the escrows to the purchaser (either as purchased property or as development rights), and in determining that the developer's principal had no claim to the escrows. The judgment is reversed and the case remanded for a determination of the ownership of the escrows as between the development company and its principal.
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
041386 Bentley Funding Group v. SK&R Group 03/03/2005 In a dispute over ownership of cash erosion control escrow deposits, the trial court erred in finding that a development company's failure to list the escrows as assets in bankruptcy filings precluded its ownership claim, in determining that a contract conveying the property to a new purchaser transferred the escrows to the purchaser (either as purchased property or as development rights), and in determining that the developer's principal had no claim to the escrows. The judgment is reversed and the case remanded for a determination of the ownership of the escrows as between the development company and its principal.
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
