The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Purce v. Patterson
No. 062368Supreme Court of Virginia
062368 Purce v. Patterson 01/11/2008 The trial court did not err in ruling that an estranged husband was not eligible for an elective share of the spouse's augmented estate under Code § 64.1-16.3. The record s…
Clerk language is kept verbatim. Vote Files does not infer who is winning.The movement
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The proof
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
062368 Purce v. Patterson 01/11/2008 The trial court did not err in ruling that an estranged husband was not eligible for an elec…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First seen
- Oct 4, 2026
- Last entry
- Jan 11, 2008
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
062368 Purce v. Patterson 01/11/2008 The trial court did not err in ruling that an estranged husband was not eligible for an elective share of the spouse's augmented estate under Code § 64.1-16.3. The record shows that both before and after the parties separated, the husband showed none of the normal indicia of supporting his spouse or of the marital relationship. The evidence was sufficient to support the trial court's holding that he abandoned his wife prior to and continuing until the time of her death under Code § 64.1-16.3. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court that he was not eligible for an elective share of the wife's augmented estate is affirmed.
Open court document ↗Documents and links