Search

Search Constraints

Start Over You searched for: Subjects Affidavits--Virginia--Pittsylvania County. Remove constraint Subjects: Affidavits--Virginia--Pittsylvania County.

Search Results

Patrick County (Va.) Court Records, 1834-1854

Abstract Or Scope

Pittsylvania County (Va.) Court Records, 1834-1854. The collection contains various documents removed from Pittsylvania County court records, as follows: an answer from the chancery cause Administrator of Josiah Morton vs. James Smith, etc., 1834; the deposition of John Barnes from the Superior Court of Law and Chancery cause Adams Sutherlin vs. Thomas Sutherlin, etc., 1834; a copy, 1832, of the Guardian Accounts of Stephen Terry, Guardian of the Heirs of William Terry, 1825-1829; a bill from the chancery cause Deny Wills vs. Enoch Gerry and wife, etc., 1836; a letter from Notley P. Adams to Captain John E. Brown, used as an exhibit in the chancery cause Notley Adams vs. Administrators of John E. Brown, 1837; a deed from Rawlins and Coleman to Luke Palmer, 1842; an affidavit from the case Lipscomb vs. Barker, 1845; the deposition of Thomas F. Poindexter from the case Theophilus Collins vs. John H. Carter, 1846; a letter from S.E. White to William Rison, 1846 Aug. 30 pertaining to the settlement of the state of White's father; affidavits of Sally Keesee from the case, Sally Keesee and William Anderson vs. George P. Keesee, 1846; a deposition wrapper from the case Administrator of Tarpley vs. Executor of Price, 1848; a letter from C.B. Taliaferro, Bank of Virginia in Danville, to William H. Tunstall, concerning the accounts of A.C. Shelton, 1850 Nov. 4; a bill from the chancery cause James B. Harris vs. William Smith, Trustee, 1850; and a bill from the chancery cause Benjamin Watkins vs. William R. McCoy, etc., 1854.

1 result

Patrick County (Va.) Court Records, 1834-1854

Content Warning

ARVAS is an aggregator of archival resources. ARVAS does not have control of the descriptive language used in our members’ finding aids.

Finding aids may contain historical terms and phrases, reflecting the shared attitudes and values of the community from which they were collected, but are offensive to modern readers. These include demeaning and dehumanizing references to race, ethnicity, and nationality; enslaved or free status; physical or mental ability; religion; sex; and sexual orientation and gender identity.

Many institutions and organizations are in the process of reviewing and revising their descriptive language, with the intent to describe materials in more humanizing, inclusive, and harm-reductive ways. As members revise their descriptive language, their changes will eventually be reflected in their ARVAS finding aids.