Skip to page content
Power & PoliticsUnited States edition
Sections
Only your five-digit ZIP code is sent. We never ask for your address.
Independent · nonpartisan
Illustrative anonymous person approaching a public clerk intake window
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC

Perez v. Capital One Bank

No. 990677Supreme Court of Virginia

990677 Perez v. Capital One Bank 11/05/1999 A certified question, whether § 6.1-330.63 of the Virginia Code precludes a challenge, under the common law doctrine of unlawful liquidated damages, to late fees inc…

The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.
01
The caption

The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.

02
The activity

Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.

03
The source

The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.

Current update

990677 Perez v. Capital One Bank 11/05/1999 A certified question, whether § 6.1-330.63 of the Virginia Code precludes a challenge…

At a glance
Court
Supreme Court of Virginia
First added here
October 4, 2026
Last entry
November 5, 1999
Policy at issue

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

990677 Perez v. Capital One Bank 11/05/1999 A certified question, whether § 6.1-330.63 of the Virginia Code precludes a challenge, under the common law doctrine of unlawful liquidated damages, to late fees included in contracts between credit-card issuers and card holders, where those contracts are governed by Virginia law, is answered in the affirmative.

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.

No official record has been found at this time. We are watching for updates.

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; 1 such entry was left out of this case. 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