The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Tidewater Psychiatric Inst. v. City of Virginia Be
No. 971635Supreme Court of Virginia
971635 Tidewater Psychiatric Inst. v. City of Virginia Be 06/05/1998 In a taxpayer's appeal from a judgment upholding assessments of a private psychiatric hospital for the tax years 1990 through 1995, the judg…
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.
971635 Tidewater Psychiatric Inst. v. City of Virginia Be 06/05/1998 In a taxpayer's appeal from a judgment upholding assessments…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- June 5, 1998
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
971635 Tidewater Psychiatric Inst. v. City of Virginia Be 06/05/1998 In a taxpayer's appeal from a judgment upholding assessments of a private psychiatric hospital for the tax years 1990 through 1995, the judgment is affirmed because the taxpayer failed to meet its burden of showing that a city's choice of depreciated reproduction cost as the method for valuing a particular property was manifest error or in disregard of controlling evidence.
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
971635 Tidewater Psychiatric Inst. v. City of Virginia Be 06/05/1998 In a taxpayer's appeal from a judgment upholding assessments of a private psychiatric hospital for the tax years 1990 through 1995, the judgment is affirmed because the taxpayer failed to meet its burden of showing that a city's choice of depreciated reproduction cost as the method for valuing a particular property was manifest error or in disregard of controlling evidence.
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