Don't Miss
Home / Fulltext Opinions (page 410)

Fulltext Opinions

Feed Subscription

GILLILAND v. GILLILAND

Summary affirmance - no error in trial court's decision concerning equitable distribution award or in award of attorney's fees to appellee related to appellant's motion for reconsideration

Read More »

ACHESON v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in admitting certificate of analysis from appellant's blood alcohol test and in finding evidence sufficient to convict appellant of driving under the influence

Read More »

IN RE: ADAMS

Petition for a Writ of Actual Innocence dismissed where petitioner has proffered no evidence that was previously unknown or unavailable as required by Code Section 19.2-327.11

Read More »

GRUETTNER v. GRUETTNER

Trial court did not err in granting a divorce on the basis of husband's desertion or regarding spousal support and attorney's fees awards

Read More »

COMMONWEALTH v. HILL

Trial court erred in granting appellee's motion to suppress as evidence was obtained pursuant to a valid search within an area subject to appellee's immediate control

Read More »

MEDLIN v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding that the evidence was sufficient to prove that appellant used the vehicle in question without authority.

Read More »

DAVENPORT v. G.D.C., INC.

Trial court applied an incorrect standard in making its determination; the trial court was required to determine under the Virginia Overhead High Voltage Line Safety Act whether the hazard was "open and obvious" and whether G.D.C., Inc. "knew or should have known of the problem [or practice or condition] on the worksite that resulted in [employee's] death."

Read More »

AKERS v. FAUQUIER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

No error in trial court's order terminating appellant's parental rights to child; trial court did not err in ruling that DSS did not have to afford appellant services after goal changed to adoption; trial did not err in finding that the requirements of Code Section 16.1-382(C)(1) and (2) were proved; trial court did not err in considering child's preferences.

Read More »

SMITH v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in denying appellant's motion to withdraw guilty plea; credible evidence supports the trial court's denial of the motion

Read More »

ELEY v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in admitting the juvenile court petition to prove the age of the minor to whom appellant distributed cocaine; even if the arresting officer's testimony regarding appellant's age was erroneously admitted it was harmless error; other evidence provided sufficient grounds from which the trial court could deduce appellant's age.

Read More »

FRIMPONG v. COMMONWEALTH

Appellant's conviction for first-degree murder is affirmed; because Walshaw v. Commonwealth, 44 Va. App. __, 2004 Va. App. LEXIS 483, at * 13 (2004), governs this case, appellant's challenge to the statutory short-form indictment is rejected.

Read More »

HARRISON v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in ordering that the sentences run consecutively when the jury requested that they run concurrently; outcome of case deterimined by statutory mandate of Code Section 19.2-308.

Read More »

NEELY v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court erred in finding that it did not have jurisdiction under Code Section 19.2-303 to consider a motion to modify sentence while the defendant was in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons; trial court also erred in ruling that Rule 1:1 deprived it of jurisdiction to entertain defendant's motion to modify his sentence.

Read More »

HAR-LEE COAL COMPANY, et al. v. MULLINS

The commission did not err in finding that claimant met his burden of proof as the finding is supported by credible evidence and reasonable inferences drawn from the evidence; employer's due process rights were not violated and commission did not err in denying motion to vacate the review opinion and remand the case for further proceedings; doctrine of imposition does not apply.

Read More »

UNION OF NEEDLETRADES v. JONES

In a common law defamation action by a former local union administrator against the union, the trial court erred in failing to grant the defendant union's motion to strike the evidence where the plaintiff failed to establish that an allegedly defamatory statement regarding indications of "financial malpractice" at the local union, made in a resolution adopted by the union's general executive board and sent to the officers of the local union, was false. The judgment of the trial court is reversed and final judgment entered for the defendant.

Read More »

SMITH v. IRVING, et al.

In the trial of a medical malpractice action in which the jury returned a verdict for the defendant physician, the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to permit the plaintiff to cross-examine the defendant regarding ?standard of care? issues not addressed by the defendant's testimony on direct examination. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF FAIRFAX COUNTY v. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF FAIRFAX COUNTY, et al.

The circuit court correctly determined that a county board of supervisors had standing under Code § 15.2-2314 as a "person aggrieved" to seek reversal of a variance granted by the county's board of zoning appeals. However, because the applicable zoning restrictions did not interfere with all reasonable beneficial uses of the property at issue, that court erred in concluding that the variance was properly granted. The judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and the case is remanded for entry of an order vacating the variance.

Read More »

COWAN v. HOSPICE SUPPORT CARE

The circuit court erred in sustaining a plea of charitable immunity to pleadings alleging gross negligence as well as willful and wanton negligence committed by volunteers of the defendant charity, a residential hospice facility. The public policy rationale shielding a charity from liability for acts of simple negligence does not extend to acts of gross negligence or acts of willful and wanton negligence. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded.

Read More »

LINDEMAN v. LESNICK

In a defamation case, the trial court did not err in refusing to strike the evidence based on a claim that the defamatory statements were made by a workers' compensation award recipient to his counsel, long after the award of benefits was finalized. The judgment for the plaintiff is affirmed.

Read More »

COMMONWEALTH v. NORMAN

Sufficient evidence existed supporting a defendant's conviction for operating a motor vehicle after having been declared a habitual offender, second or subsequent offense, in violation of Code § 46.2-357, where a prior order issued by the circuit court restoring the defendant?s privilege to operate a motor vehicle on the condition that he fulfill certain requirements did not terminate his habitual offender status. The judgment of the Court of Appeals invalidating defendant's conviction and dismissing the indictment is reversed, and the defendant's conviction is reinstated.

Read More »

AUSTIN v. COMMONWEALTH

The Court of Appeals correctly upheld the circuit court's denial of a juvenile's motion to dismiss parole revocation proceedings because under Code § 16.1-241 the circuit court acquired subject matter jurisdiction over the matter upon the juvenile's appeal from the juvenile and domestic relations court, and the circuit court retained such jurisdiction under Code § 16.1-297 at the time when the parole revocation proceedings were initiated. The Court of Appeals' judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

HALIFAX CORPORATION v. WACHOVIA BANK

In a case seeking to impose liability upon a bank relating to embezzlement of an account holder's corporate funds by its own comptroller, the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment for the defendant bank because Code § 8.3A-406 does not create an affirmative cause of action, the plaintiff's common law claim for conversion has been displaced by Code § 8.3A-420(a), and plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts to state a cause of action for aiding and abetting the embezzler's breach of fiduciary duty, assuming such an action exists. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

PEYTON v. COMMONWEALTH

The trial court abused its discretion in revoking the suspended sentence of a defendant who had been placed in an alternative sentencing program pursuant to Code § 19.2-316.2 and who was unable to complete that program due to an unforeseen medical condition. Such inability does not satisfy the definition of "intractable behavior" under the statute and in this case cannot reasonably be considered willful behavior on defendant's part. The judgment of the Court of Appeals affirming the trial court's revocation of defendant's suspended sentence is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.

Read More »

CITY OF CHESAPEAKE v. CUNNINGHAM

In a case concerning a municipality's liability for injuries allegedly caused by consumption of contaminated municipal drinking water, the trial court erred in denying the municipality's sovereign immunity plea. Planning and design decisions regarding upgrading of a water treatment plant and dissemination of information to the public regarding temporary health hazards associated with consuming municipal drinking water during the upgrade process were governmental functions of the municipality. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and final judgment is entered in the municipality's favor.

Read More »

CUNNINGHAM v. CITY OF CHESAPEAKE

In a case concerning a municipality's liability for injuries allegedly caused by consumption of contaminated municipal drinking water, the trial court erred in denying the municipality's sovereign immunity plea. Planning and design decisions regarding upgrading of a water treatment plant and dissemination of information to the public regarding temporary health hazards associated with consuming municipal drinking water during the upgrade process were governmental functions of the municipality. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and final judgment is entered in the municipality's favor.

Read More »

NELSON v. COMMONWEALTH

In a prosecution for sexual offenses against a minor, the Court of Appeals did not err in ruling that the trial court correctly reviewed sensitive medical records of the victim in camera and properly refused to allow examination of the records by the defendant, and the Court of Appeals did not err in ruling that the trial court correctly declined to conduct a hearing regarding allegations of a juror's possible bias. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

CHANDLER v. GRAFFEO

In a medical malpractice case, the trial court erred in admitting a medical malpractice review panel's opinion favoring the defense and testimony of its members into evidence when that opinion was not timely rendered under Code § 8.01-581.7:1, permitting two panel members to testify as experts for the defense, granting jury instructions on the issue of contributory negligence, and allowing the defendant physician to recite the out-of-court opinion of a non-testifying physician as to the applicable standard of care. The judgment is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.

Read More »

COVIL v. COMMONWEALTH

The circumstances properly considered by the trial court were sufficient to support defendant's conviction for grand larceny resulting from possession of recently stolen property. The judgment of the Court of Appeals upholding the conviction is affirmed.

Read More »

DANIEL v. COMMONWEALTH

The trial court did not err in concluding that an assault and battery charge taken under advisement for one year, and later dismissed, was not ?otherwise dismissed? as contemplated by Code § 19.2-392.2(A)(2), and it properly denied a petition for expungement on that ground. Further, the statute does not contemplate a hearing to permit the petitioner to assert his innocence of the original criminal charge. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

WINSTON v. COMMONWEALTH

No error is found in review of three counts of capital murder and related felony convictions. Issues concerning appointment of defense experts, seating and removal of jurors, admission of evidence, in-court identification testimony, jury instructions and verdict forms, malice, concerted action/joint participation, depravity of mind, lesser included offenses, as well as sufficiency of the evidence, double jeopardy, and mental retardation issues are considered. Sentence proportionality issues are also addressed. The defendant's convictions and death sentences are affirmed.

Read More »

AMSTUTZ v. EVERETT JONES LUMBER CORP.

In two collected suits involving asserted prescriptive easement rights over a roadway on private land, there was not credible evidence to support the circuit court finding that a lumber company and an adjoining landowner had established such an easement under the clear and convincing evidence standard. Use of the roadway was not of sufficient continuity to give notice to the owners of the putative servient tenement that an easement was being exercised for agricultural, forestry, timbering or logging purposes. The judgment of the circuit court granting the prescriptive easement is reversed.

Read More »

TUCKER v. COMMONWEALTH

Because under Code § 18.2-102 the crime of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle is committed upon the ?use? of a vehicle without the owner?s consent, regardless of whether initial possession of the vehicle was obtained by a trespassory taking, the Court of Appeals' judgment allowing defendant's conviction for this offense to stand is affirmed.

Read More »

PARR v. ALDERWOODS GROUP, INC.

Several contemporaneously executed contracts relating to the acquisition of a funeral home business are treated as integrated in determining the enforceability of various provisions in the contracts after one party's default. The noncompetition provisions in a business management agreement and restrictive covenants in a related lease were unenforceable by a party which had defaulted on its payment obligations in the transaction. The judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and final judgment is entered.

Read More »

CITY OF MARTINSVILLE v. COMMONWEALTH BOULEVARD ASSOCIATES, LLC

A taxpayer is entitled to relief under Code § 58.1-3984 for real estate taxes erroneously assessed during the interim between general reassessments, and may challenge an annual levy of taxes without showing that the previous general reassessment, upon which the annual levy was based, was erroneous. An order reducing an assessment is affirmed.

Read More »
Scroll To Top