The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Schlegel v. Bank of America
No. 051651Supreme Court of Virginia
051651 Schlegel v. Bank of America 04/21/2006 In litigation involving funds frozen by a receiving bank after transfer pursuant to unauthorized payment orders, Code § 8.4A-204(a) preempts certain common law cla…
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.
051651 Schlegel v. Bank of America 04/21/2006 In litigation involving funds frozen by a receiving bank after transfer pursuant to…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First seen
- Oct 4, 2026
- Last entry
- Apr 21, 2006
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
051651 Schlegel v. Bank of America 04/21/2006 In litigation involving funds frozen by a receiving bank after transfer pursuant to unauthorized payment orders, Code § 8.4A-204(a) preempts certain common law claims relating to the unauthorized payment, but does not preempt common law claims relating to the subsequent freezing of the funds. Further, while the trial court did not err in awarding attorney's fees in the bank's related interpleader action, it abused its discretion in failing to limit the award to necessary and appropriate fees and in its apportionment of the award among the obligated parties. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Open court document ↗Documents and links