The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
River Heights v. Batten
No. 030180Supreme Court of Virginia
030180 River Heights v. Batten 01/16/2004 (Revised 07/01/2004) The trial court correctly held that owners of lots in a subdivision sufficiently showed a justiciable controversy under Virginia's declaratory jud…
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.
030180 River Heights v. Batten 01/16/2004 (Revised 07/01/2004) The trial court correctly held that owners of lots in a subdivisio…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- January 16, 2004
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
030180 River Heights v. Batten 01/16/2004 (Revised 07/01/2004) The trial court correctly held that owners of lots in a subdivision sufficiently showed a justiciable controversy under Virginia's declaratory judgment statutes, and correctly determined that a restrictive covenant prohibiting commercial use of certain lots within the subdivision was not rendered unenforceable, either as the result of a plat note restricting access to the lots if they were to be put to residential uses, or as the result of changed conditions. The judgment of the trial court 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
Affirmed
The court's record, as written
030180 River Heights v. Batten 01/16/2004 (Revised 07/01/2004) The trial court correctly held that owners of lots in a subdivision sufficiently showed a justiciable controversy under Virginia's declaratory judgment statutes, and correctly determined that a restrictive covenant prohibiting commercial use of certain lots within the subdivision was not rendered unenforceable, either as the result of a plat note restricting access to the lots if they were to be put to residential uses, or as the result of changed conditions. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Outcome words in this text: 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
Documents and links