The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Shalimar Development v. FDIC
No. 981365Supreme Court of Virginia
981365 Shalimar Development v. FDIC 04/16/1999 Since there was no evidence that negotiations between plaintiff real estate firm and potential purchasers resulted in or facilitated the ultimate sale of the prop…
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.
981365 Shalimar Development v. FDIC 04/16/1999 Since there was no evidence that negotiations between plaintiff real estate firm a…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- April 16, 1999
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
981365 Shalimar Development v. FDIC 04/16/1999 Since there was no evidence that negotiations between plaintiff real estate firm and potential purchasers resulted in or facilitated the ultimate sale of the property, the trial court correctly determined as a matter of law that the plaintiff was not the procuring cause of the particular sale and, thus, that this issue was improperly submitted to the jury. Its action in setting aside the greater part of a jury verdict for the plaintiff relating to this sale 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
981365 Shalimar Development v. FDIC 04/16/1999 Since there was no evidence that negotiations between plaintiff real estate firm and potential purchasers resulted in or facilitated the ultimate sale of the property, the trial court correctly determined as a matter of law that the plaintiff was not the procuring cause of the particular sale and, thus, that this issue was improperly submitted to the jury. Its action in setting aside the greater part of a jury verdict for the plaintiff relating to this sale 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