Don't Miss
Home / Fulltext Opinions / Supreme Court of Virginia (page 61)

Supreme Court of Virginia

Feed Subscription

Cochran v. Fairfax Cty. Bd. of Zoning Appeals

Under Code § 15.2-2309(2) a board of zoning appeals has no authority to grant a variance from the applicable zoning ordinance provisions unless the ordinance, as applied to the property under consideration, would, in the absence of a variance, interfere with all reasonable beneficial uses of the property, taken as a whole. Three judgments involving variance resolutions are reversed and final judgments are entered.

Read More »

Filak v. George

In an action alleging breach of contract and constructive fraud based on an insurance agent's alleged failure to procure a fire insurance policy with certain provisions, the circuit court did not err in sustaining the defendant's demurrer to a constructive fraud claim and in striking the plaintiff's evidence on a breach of contract claim. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

Dandridge v. Marshall

In a personal injury action, the trial court erred in excluding certain testimony proffered by the plaintiff and allowing other testimony over objection. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial on the issue of damages.

Read More »

Slagle v. Hartford Insurance Company

The trial court erred in denying summary judgment for an injured plaintiff, who was "using" a tractor-trailer in a manner contemplated by Code § 38.2-2206(B) when he was injured and, thus, was entitled to underinsured motorist coverage despite the fact that he had neither previously occupied nor immediately intended to occupy the tractor-trailer at the time of his injury. The judgment is reversed and final judgment is entered for plaintiff.

Read More »

Schwartz v. Commonwealth

The circuit court did not err in finding defendant guilty of three counts of arson where the facts showed that two vehicles and a home were destroyed by fire ignited on one of the vehicles. The judgment of the Court of Appeals confirming these convictions is affirmed.

Read More »

Video Zone, Inc. v. KF&F Properties

The circuit court did not err in holding that the terms of a commercial lease required a tenant to replace certain heating, ventilation, and air conditioning equipment located primarily on the roof of the leased premises. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

MacNeal v. Town of Pulaski Bd. of Zoning Appeals

Under Code § 15.2-2309(2) a board of zoning appeals has no authority to grant a variance from the applicable zoning ordinance provisions unless the ordinance, as applied to the property under consideration, would, in the absence of a variance, interfere with all reasonable beneficial uses of the property, taken as a whole. Three judgments involving variance resolutions are reversed and final judgments are entered.

Read More »

Maddox v. Commonwealth

In a personal injury claim arising out of a bicycle accident, the trial court did not err in dismissing the action on grounds of sovereign immunity. The nuisance claims in this case are precluded by the legislative function exception to the Commonwealth?s waiver of sovereign immunity in the Virginia Tort Claims Act. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

Bd. of Zoning of the City of Virginia Beach v. Pennington

Under Code § 15.2-2309(2) a board of zoning appeals has no authority to grant a variance from the applicable zoning ordinance provisions unless the ordinance, as applied to the property under consideration, would, in the absence of a variance, interfere with all reasonable beneficial uses of the property, taken as a whole. Three judgments involving variance resolutions are reversed and final judgments are entered.

Read More »

Southern Floors and Acoustics v. Max-Yeboah

In a personal injury action against a grocery store, the issue of contributory negligence was properly submitted to the jury, but the court erred in instructing the jury that the store could be liable for the negligence of an independent contractor working on the floors. The store did not have a duty to supervise the work and did not have actual or constructive knowledge of the condition causing plaintiff's injury. Final judgment is entered affirming in part and reversing in part.

Read More »

Food Lion, Inc. v. Max-Yeboah

In a personal injury action against a grocery store, the issue of contributory negligence was properly submitted to the jury, but the court erred in instructing the jury that the store could be liable for the negligence of an independent contractor working on the floors. The store did not have a duty to supervise the work and did not have actual or constructive knowledge of the condition causing plaintiff's injury. Final judgment is entered affirming in part and reversing in part.

Read More »

Jones v. Hill

The trial court correctly ruled that a lien may attach to the vested interest of a remainderman who takes from a life tenant having full power to dispose of the entire corpus of the estate, and that a creditor of a remainderman may enforce the lien after the death of the life tenant, when the remainderman predeceases the life tenant. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

O'Neill v. Windshire-Copeland Associates

In responding to a certified question of law, it is held that a personal injury plaintiff's contributory negligence in connection with a fall from an apartment balcony may be relied upon by the defendant apartment owner even where the protective railing of the balcony does not comply with municipal building code height requirements.

Read More »

Fireman's Fund Insurance Co. v. Sleigh

In a declaratory judgment proceeding, the trial court correctly concluded that an uninsured motorist's use of a car door to injure the insured was a use of the uninsured vehicle "as a vehicle" such that uninsured motorist coverage was applicable under Code § 38.2-2206 and the terms of the injured insured's own motor vehicle insurance policy. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

Orbe v. Johnson

The trial court did not err in refusing injunctive relief staying appellant's execution because it lacked power to grant such relief and because a declaratory judgment action could not serve as the vehicle for obtaining such relief, due to the removal of appellant's claimed constitutional issues from actual controversy by operation of a statute under which he was deemed to have selected the method of his execution. Appellant's appeal and his request for a stay of execution are denied.

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 »

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 »

Kingsbur v. Commonwealth

The trial court correctly concluded that, in spite of its being in a state of disrepair, a handgun that was found in the defendant's possession was a firearm for purposes of Code &#167 18.2-308.2 and did not err in refusing to grant the defendant's motion to strike the evidence supporting his conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The judgment of the Court of Appeals upholding the defendant's conviction is affirmed.

Read More »

Elliott (Larry) v. Commonwealth

The automatic review of defendant's death sentence is consolidated with appeal of his capital murder and other non-capital convictions. Upon considering the issues raised by the defendant and conducting the mandated review of the imposition of the death penalty in this case, no error is found in the judgment of the trial court. The judgment and the sentence of death are affirmed. (Revised 3/31/04)

Read More »

King George Serv. Authority v. Presidential Servic

The circuit court was correct in specifically enforcing an agreement for the purchase of a private water company's existing water system by a county service authority under an agreement ratified by the authority's board, but erred in directing the authority to purchase other water and sewer system facilities because there was no resolution of the authority's board authorizing or ratifying a further agreement. The decree is affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Read More »

Harrison-Wyatt LLC v. Ratliff

The trial court correctly ruled that where a surface owner of a tract of land, or his predecessor-in-title, has conveyed all the coal in and under his land, title to the coal bed methane gas in the tract has not passed to the coal owner along with the coal. The trial court's judgment is affirmed. (Revised 4/1/04)

Read More »

Commonwealth v. Duncan

The Court of Appeals erred in reversing a circuit court's holding that a defendant's acts and omissions in the care of his six-month- old son were "so gross, wanton and culpable as to show a reckless disregard for human life" under Code &#167 18.2-371.1. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed and the defendant's conviction for child abuse and neglect is reinstated in accordance with the circuit court's judgment order.

Read More »

Gambrell v. City of Norfolk

In a personal injury action involving a "slip and fall" accident on snow and ice in a municipal parking lot, the evidence was sufficient to support the circuit court's decision sustaining the city's special plea of sovereign immunity since the action related to governmental functions after a major snow storm.

Read More »

Washington v. United Parcel Service

In a workers' compensation appeal, the Court of Appeals erred in addressing an issue of causal connection that was not properly before that court and not properly before the Commission. As a result, there was no basis for concluding that the claimant would be unjustly enriched by receiving benefits to which he was not entitled. A prior award of benefits remains valid, and the refusal to assess a 20% penalty was error. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings. (Revised 3/8/04)

Read More »

The Dunbar Group LLC v. Tignor

In litigation involving the requested expulsion of a member of a limited liability company and an application for judicial dissolution of that entity, the trial court's judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and final judgment is entered.

Read More »

Wright v. Kaye

In a medical malpractice action, the trial court erred in striking the plaintiff's expert witnesses and granting summary judgment for the defendant doctor. The court also erred in failing to grant certain in limine motions to exclude the discussions about risks of surgery and to bar certain hearsay statements. Other in limine motions were correctly decided. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.

Read More »

Lewis v. Commonwealth

No error is found in a review of the sentences of death imposed upon defendant after her guilty plea to charges of capital murder for hire in violation of Code &#167 18.2-31(2), robbery and related firearms offenses. There is no reason to commute the death sentences, and the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Read More »

Beck v. Shelton

The trial court did not err in concluding that members-elect of a public body are not "members" under the plain language of The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and that a neighborhood street gathering was not a "meeting" under the FOIA, but did err in concluding that the e-mail communications used in this case constituted a "meeting" under the FOIA. The judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and final judgment is entered. (Revised 4/1/04)

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 »
Scroll To Top