Court Opinion

ID: 9580924
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:10:15.750189+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:36:36.205947
License: Public Domain

Carrico, J.,
dissenting.
I would reverse the decree of the trial court and dismiss the petition because I am of opinion that Code § 55-66.5 (b) is not applicable under the circumstances of this case to provide the relief sought in the petition.
I think the provisions of subsection (b) of Code § 55-66.5 are designed to provide relief only where the sum due upon an indebtedness clearly appears or is easily computable. I cannot conceive that the Legislature intended the Code section to apply to a situation where, as here, the court must inquire into and resolve the complicated and contested contractual undertakings of the parties in order to arrive at a sum due.
In Turnbull v. Mann, 94 Va. 182, 26 S.E. 510 (1897), and Wagner v. Peters, 142 Va. 412, 128 S.E. 445 (1925), this Court properly limited the application of subsection (a) of Code § 55-66.5 to those instances where actual payment or discharge of an indebtedness can be shown. I see no reason to extend the application of subsection (b) beyond those instances where the sum due upon an indebtedness is known or is readily ascertainable.