Quantcast
Home / Letters to the Editor (page 10) /

Letters to the Editor

VSB responds to Coalition for Choice on UPL 183 (access required)

Dear Editor: I am writing in response to the article in your Oct. 19 issue, “Coalition for Choice May Target VSB’s UPL System,” and in particular, to comments attributed in that article to R. Brian Ball, a “coalition representative,” and ...

Read More »

ASA also offers valuable real estate credential (access required)

Dear Editor: Your recent article, “Using Experts in Family Law Practice,”(Aug. 31, 1998) noted that “when it comes to real estate appraisals, the standard credential sought by lawyers is the ‘MAI’ designation…”. The American Society of Appraisers represents more than ...

Read More »

Where's Woodrow? (access required)

Dear Editor: I just finished reading your Sept. 7 issue and have one question. What happened to poor Woodrow? You began your article on page B-3 (“Fall Travel: Go visit a famous lawyer’s home”) with a statement that the homes ...

Read More »

Use of 'credit' for HO routine in Hampton Roads (access required)

Dear Editor: I read with interest your article in the Aug. 17 issue regarding credit under the habitual offender statutes for a second or subsequent offense DUI license suspension. (“HO gets partial license with suspension ‘credit'”) Although I am not ...

Read More »

Reasons for deviations in sentencing explained (access required)

Dear Editor: Thank you for your coverage in the June 8 issue of area judges’ adherence to state sentencing guidelines (“Sentencing guidelines compliance made public”). While your article correctly noted that the Henrico County judges are following the guidelines more ...

Read More »

More Than Pro Bono Needed for Indigent (access required)

Dear Editor: I appreciate your publication’s interest in the pro bono obligations of members of the Virginia State Bar. It is important for lawyers to give of their time to provide assistance to those who are lacking in financial means. ...

Read More »

Pro se litigant responds to article (access required)

Dear Editor: I would like to respond to the “Pro Se” article in your April 20, 1998 edition (“Dealing with Pro Se Opponents”.) It seemed to be written with the lawyer in mind and I would like to add the ...

Read More »

Fairfax conciliation offers help on dealing with pro ses (access required)

Dear Editor: Your readers in the Northern Virginia area who are required to deal with pro se opponents litigating in the Circuit Court of Fairfax County might avoid some of the problems enumerated in your recent article (“Dealing with pro ...

Read More »

Fee Dispute Resolution Programs (access required)

Dear Editor: Thank you for your excellent overview of fee dispute resolution programs. Through this partnership of the State Bar and local bar groups, lawyers are given an inexpensive and civilized alternative to the unsavory choices of suing clients for ...

Read More »

'Disclosure' rule: The Sunday School perspective (access required)

Dear Editor: I wish to respond to Donald D. Litten’s letter in the Dec. 29 edition of Virginia Lawyers Weekly, concerning the proposed Rule 3.1 changes. I have the greatest respect for Mr. Litten’s opinions as well as his nearly ...

Read More »