Don't Miss
Home / Fulltext Opinions (page 427)

Fulltext Opinions

Feed Subscription

Jordan v. Jordan

The trial court considered wife's current needs and husband's current ability to pay prior to modifying the amount of spousal support, no error or abuse of discretion in the trial court's award.

Read More »

Harris v. Harris

The evidence was sufficient to retrace the husband's separate property,and, therefore, the trial judge's decision is reversed.

Read More »

Orbe v. Warden

A petition for writ of habeas corpus attempting to challenge the constitutionality of Virginia's lethal injection protocol is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction where the petition failed to challenge petitioner's death sentence and either the fact or the duration of petitioner's imprisonment, and did not seek a determination that petitioner was entitled to an immediate or speedier release.

Read More »

Orbe v. Johnson

The trial court correctly dismissed appellant's declaratory judgment action seeking an adjudication that Virginia's lethal injection protocol violates the Constitution of Virginia and a permanent injunction preventing the use of such protocol in carrying out his execution where appellant was deemed, by operation of statute, to have selected lethal injection rather than electrocution as the method of his execution. Appellant's petition for appeal and motions attendant thereto are denied.

Read More »

Branch v. COMMONWEALTH

No error in trial court's determination of guilt, appellant was convicted of a felony and thereafter, knowingly and intentionally purchased, and consequently possessed, the firearm.

Read More »

Abshire v. COMMONWEALTH

Evidence was sufficient to prove appellant's conduct was deliberate, willful, and so gross and wanton as to show a reckless disregard for human life.

Read More »

Reeves v. COMMONWEALTH

Appellant failed to prove an irregularity in the impaneling of the jury panel, the trial court did not err in denying his motion for a new trial.

Read More »

Holohan v. Holohan

The trial court did not err in the amount of its award of spousal support to wife, in determining the child support award, and in its denial of attorney's fees to wife

Read More »

Ash v. Ash

Appellant failed to meet her burden to overcome the presumption that the severance package was entirely husband's separate property

Read More »

McDonald v. Minton

Summarily affirmance: No error in the award of attorney's fees to appellee;case remanded to determine proper amount of the award

Read More »

Benthall v. Benthall

The trial court abused its discretion in reducing the spousal support award;reverse trial court decision and dismiss appellee's petition to modify spousal support

Read More »

Feldman v. Feldman

As spousal support must be determined before child support obligation is determined, judgment of trial court is reversed and appellee's petition to modify spousal support is dismissed.

Read More »

Floyd County School Board, et al v. Woolwine

Summary affirmance: No error in commission's decision finding appellee's condition and treatment are related to injury by accident, naming his authorized treating physicians and making any referrals by those physicians employer's responsiblity.

Read More »

McNeese v. Taylor

Summarily affirm the decision of the trial court;remand the case for a determination of husband's attorney's fees and costs incident to this appeal.

Read More »

Bragg v. COMMONWEALTH

Evidence supports the trial court's finding that appellant entertained a separate and distinct intent to commit the various acts of embezzlement.

Read More »

Finnerty v. Thornton Hall, Inc.

The trial court, therefore, correctly found that DMAS failed to make its initial determinations within the four-year limitation period set forth in Code § 32.1-325.1:1(B).

Read More »

Bates v. Commonwealth

In a wrongful death action against the Commonwealth under the Virginia Tort Claims Act, a notice of claim naming a university medical center was sufficient to comply with the requirements of Code &#167 8.01-195.6 for identification of the "place" where the injury was alleged to have occurred. The trial court erred in sustaining a plea of sovereign immunity and dismissing the claim with prejudice. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings.

Read More »

Barkley v. Wallace

Because the circuit court erred in ruling that evidence of a personal injury plaintiff's medical bills and expenses that were discharged in bankruptcy was inadmissible for the limited purpose of proving her pain and suffering caused by the accident, the judgment is reversed and the case is remanded.

Read More »

Phipps v. Liddle

Where the granting of a nonsuit was appealed, Code &#167 8.01-229(E)(3) afforded the plaintiff six months to refile the action, running from the date the appellate court's mandate resolving the appeal was entered by the trial court. Because the plaintiff refiled the present action within that period, the trial court erred in dismissing it as untimely. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings.

Read More »

Jerman v. Director Dept. of Corrections

In a petition for a writ of habeas corpus raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel with regard to the petitioner's conviction for abduction, there is not a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's alleged deficiencies, the outcome of the proceeding would have been different. The petition is dismissed.

Read More »

AAA Disposal Services v. Eckert

A confession of judgment for the amount specified in the ad damnum clause of a motion for judgment was not valid and binding under Code &#167 8.01-431 without the plaintiff's acceptance. Therefore, the circuit court did not err in granting the plaintiff's motion to nonsuit the action after the defendant's filing of the confession.

Read More »

Russ v. Destival

A jury instruction stating that a bicyclist has a duty to refrain from entering or crossing an intersection in disregard of "close or approaching" traffic is an inaccurate statement of law in light of the plain terms of Code &#167 46.2-924(B), and thus the circuit court erred in granting the instruction. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded.

Read More »

Lenz v. Warden of the Sussex I State Prison

In a rehearing of the petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus, it is concluded that trial counsel were not ineffective in failing to object to a verdict form in the sentencing phase of petitioner's capital murder trial. The petition is denied.

Read More »

Commonwealth v. Jones

The Court of Appeals erred in holding that the doctrine of inevitable discovery was inapplicable to support the trial court's refusal to suppress evidence seized in a search purportedly lacking in probable cause. The judgment is reversed and final judgment is entered.

Read More »

Elliott (Richard) v. Commonwealth

In a proceeding remanded by the U.S. Supreme Court involving the constitutionality of Virginia's cross-burning statute, Code &#167 18.2-423, it is held that the prima facie evidence provision of the statute is unconstitutionally overbroad under the First Amendment and Article I, &#167 12 of the Constitution of Virginia. The statute is severable and the core provisions of the statute that remain are constitutional. The convictions of two defendants for cross burning are affirmed. (Revised 3/9/04)

Read More »

Spero v. Heath

The trial court abused its discretion in determining that a name change was in the best interests of a minor child, where the child is in the mother's custody, lives with the mother and bears her surname. The natural father petitioned the court to change the child's surname to his own. The judgment is reversed, the name change order is vacated, and the petition is dismissed.

Read More »

Shipman v. Kruck

A cause of action for legal malpractice accrued at the time of the attorney's breach, subject to the continuous representation rule. Therefore, the plaintiffs had three years from the end of the attorney's representation of them in which to file their claim. Since the action was commenced almost three years and eight months later, the trial court did not err in granting the defendant's plea in bar of the statute of limitations. The judgment is affirmed. (Revised 3/31/04)

Read More »
Scroll To Top