MOCK v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant?s motion for a continuance

Read More »

DASH, JR. v. COALFIELD SERVICES, INC., et al.

Summary affirmance ? commission did not err in finding that the applicable statute of limitations barred appellant?s March 13, 2003 claim seeking an award of permanent total disability benefits for a brain injury and that the doctrine of imposition did not apply

Read More »

BATRA v. BATRA

No error in trial court?s denial of husband?s request for an award of attorney?s fees and costs expended in the establishment of the validity and enforcement of the Financial Agreement reached between husband and wife

Read More »

RAY KROMER v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding evidence sufficient to convict appellant of misdemeanor possession of child pornography

Read More »

KAREN A. DELUCA v. DENIS KATCHMERIC

Summary affirmance - as the order from which appellant appeals is not a final order concerning the sale of the property, the appeal, insofar as it pertains to these issues, is dismissed; appellant is procedurally barred from raising her claim for the first time on appeal that the trial court failed to act impartially; trial court did not err by finding wife in contempt

Read More »

GAE SUSAN ANDERSON-MILLER v. WALTER THOMAS GOLEMBIEWSKI

Trial court did not err in finding husband?s evidence sufficient to trace his separate property from the jointly owned marital residence, in its classification of the parties? respective interests in the marital residence, in its equitable distribution of the marital equity in the marital residence, and in awarding husband the $10,000 note proceeds

Read More »

WALTER THOMAS GOLEMBIEWSKI v. GAE SUSAN ANDERSON-MILLER

Judgment awarding appellee the IRA titled in her name is reversed and remanded for classification and distribution pursuant to Code Section 20-107.3; trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to award any rental value from the marital residence to husband or in allocating eighty-five percent of the marital equity in the marital residence to wife

Read More »

TELLO J. ANGELINA v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding that appellant voluntarily and intelligently waived his preliminary hearing on the drug charges, in finding that there was no violation of the speedy trial provisions, in admitting the drug evidence and the certificate of analysis, and in finding evidence sufficient to support appellant?s conviction of receipt of stolen property

Read More »

BRUCE FORBES v. COMMONWEALTH (117659)

Appeal dismissed as appellant?s claims of error regarding the issuance of a capias and the denial of his post-conviction bond motion are moot

Read More »

BRUCE FORBES v. COMMONWEALTH

Rule 5A:18 bars appellant from raising his claim of insufficient evidence for the first time on appeal; appellant?s contempt conviction affirmed

Read More »

CRYSTAL WOODWARD v. CITY OF HAMPTON DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

Summary affirmance ? no error in trial court?s finding that clear and convincing evidence satisfied the statutory requirements of Code Section 16.1-283(C)(2) and established that termination of appellant?s parental rights was in the child?s best interests

Read More »

KROMER v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding evidence sufficient to convict appellant of misdemeanor possession of child pornography

Read More »

DELUCA v. KATCHMERIC

Summary affirmance - as the order from which appellant appeals is not a final order concerning the sale of the property, the appeal, insofar as it pertains to these issues, is dismissed; appellant is procedurally barred from raising her claim for the first time on appeal that the trial court failed to act impartially; trial court did not err by finding wife in contempt

Read More »

ANDERSON-MILLER v. GOLEMBIEWSKI

Trial court did not err in finding husband?s evidence sufficient to trace his separate property from the jointly owned marital residence, in its classification of the parties? respective interests in the marital residence, in its equitable distribution of the marital equity in the marital residence, and in awarding husband the $10,000 note proceeds

Read More »

GOLEMBIEWSKI v. ANDERSON-MILLER

Judgment awarding appellee the IRA titled in her name is reversed and remanded for classification and distribution pursuant to Code Section 20-107.3; trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to award any rental value from the marital residence to husband or in allocating eighty-five percent of the marital equity in the marital residence to wife

Read More »

ANGELINA v. COMMONWEALTH

Trial court did not err in finding that appellant voluntarily and intelligently waived his preliminary hearing on the drug charges, in finding that there was no violation of the speedy trial provisions, in admitting the drug evidence and the certificate of analysis, and in finding evidence sufficient to support appellant?s conviction of receipt of stolen property

Read More »

FORBES v. COMMONWEALTH (117313)

Appeal dismissed as appellant?s claims of error regarding the issuance of a capias and the denial of his post-conviction bond motion are moot

Read More »

FORBES v. COMMONWEALTH

Rule 5A:18 bars appellant from raising his claim of insufficient evidence for the first time on appeal; appellant?s contempt conviction affirmed

Read More »

WOODWARD v. CITY OF HAMPTON DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

Summary affirmance ? no error in trial court?s finding that clear and convincing evidence satisfied the statutory requirements of Code Section 16.1-283(C)(2) and established that termination of appellant?s parental rights was in the child?s best interests

Read More »

AUER v. MILLER (118464)

In a wrongful death case, the trial court did not err in granting immunity to a physician pursuant to Code § 8.01-581.18 or in vacating a verdict against his practice group, where the claim was based on the physician's allegedly negligent failure to take appropriate action regarding the results of laboratory tests he neither ordered nor authorized, the physician was not presented with a report of the test results in connection with any consultation request, and the practice group's failure to respond to the decedent's post-operative telephone calls was not a proximate cause of the decedent's death. The trial court's judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

UNITED STATES v. BLACKMAN

In response to questions of law certified under Rule 5:42 from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, it is held that the law of Virginia in 1973 recognized as valid the conveyance of a negative easement in gross by a private property owner to a private party for the purpose of land conservation and historic preservation.

Read More »

NERRI v. ADU-GYAMFI

The trial court erred in granting a nonsuit in a proceeding in which a motion for judgment was signed by an attorney whose license to practice law in the Commonwealth had been administratively suspended. Under the statutes and rules regulating the practice of law and licensing of lawyers, the attorney was not authorized to practice law during this period. Thus, any pleadings filed by him or her are invalid and have no legal effect. Therefore, no valid proceeding was pending which could be nonsuited. The judgment of the trial court is reversed and final judgment is entered for the defendant.

Read More »

HOLLEY v. PAMBIANCO

It was error for the trial court to receive into evidence in a medical malpractice trial certain general statistical information related to the frequency of problems relating to diagnostic and surgical excision procedures. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded.

Read More »

CARTWRIGHT v. COMMONWEALTH TRANSPORTATION COMM'R

In a Virginia Freedom of Information Act dispute, the circuit court erred in sustaining a state agency's demurrer and in denying plaintiff?s petition for a writ of mandamus on the ground that plaintiff had an adequate remedy at law by means of discovery in a pending proceeding against the agency. Plaintiff was not required to prove absence of an adequate remedy at law, nor could the mandamus proceeding be barred on the ground that some other remedy at law was available, and the agency's eventual provision of the requested information did not render plaintiff's appeal moot. The judgment is reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.

Read More »

BATES v. MCQUEEN

Arbitrators appointed to consider a dispute under a timber sale agreement failed to conduct a hearing, and it was error for the trial court not to vacate their award because a hearing is required by the terms of Code §§ 8.01-581.04 and -581.010(4). Under the parties' agreement, the issue of attorney?s fees must be decided by arbitrators. The judgments of the circuit court are reversed.

Read More »

AUER v. MILLER

In a wrongful death case, the trial court did not err in granting immunity to a physician pursuant to Code § 8.01-581.18 or in vacating a verdict against his practice group, where the claim was based on the physician's allegedly negligent failure to take appropriate action regarding the results of laboratory tests he neither ordered nor authorized, the physician was not presented with a report of the test results in connection with any consultation request, and the practice group's failure to respond to the decedent's post-operative telephone calls was not a proximate cause of the decedent's death. The trial court's judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

COMMONWEALTH v. HILLIARD

A criminal suspect was questioned by law enforcement personnel after he invoked his right to counsel, and thus his motion to suppress an incriminating statement, made after an unequivocal request for the presence of an attorney, should have been granted. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.

Read More »

COMMONWEALTH TRANSPORTATION COMM'R v. GLASS

In a partial taking condemnation case where a landowner sought compensation for damage to properties other than those listed in the certificate of take and the petition for condemnation, and challenged the condemnor's valuation of the take, the trial court erred in confirming an award of damages for the non-listed properties, but did not err in confirming the damage award in other respects, because the landowner failed to establish unity of use among the listed and non-listed parcels. The judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and final judgment is entered.

Read More »

FARNSWORTH v. COMMONWEALTH

In a prosecution under Code § 18.2-308.2 for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, the Court of Appeals correctly concluded that the circuit court did not err in determining that restoration of the defendant's civil rights by a foreign jurisdiction following release from incarceration did not operate to permit him to lawfully possess a firearm in Virginia. As explained by the Court of Appeals, the prohibitory language of the statute is plain and unambiguous, and the defendant did not pursue either of the statutory exceptions available under its terms. The judgment is affirmed.

Read More »

MORGAN v. RUSSRAND TRIANGLE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C.

The trial court erred in entering an order nunc pro tunc more than 21 days after entry of a prior order, where entry of the prior order was not a clerical error subject to correction under Code § 8.01-428, the prior order was not suspended, modified or vacated within 21 days of its entry, and the nunc pro tunc order did not correct the record to reflect the actual chain of events. Under these circumstances the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter the nunc pro tunc order, which was of no force or effect. The judgment of the trial court is reversed and final judgment is entered reinstating the prior order.

Read More »

CITY OF LYNCHBURG v. BROWN

In a "slip and fall" personal injury case involving a damaged bleacher at a municipally-maintained athletic park, the trial court erred in refusing to rule that the plaintiff failed to establish that the municipality was guilty of gross negligence. While the municipality's employees committed acts of omission by failing to observe the open and obvious damage to the bleacher, such conduct merely amounts to ordinary negligence, and constructive knowledge of this hazard, standing alone, is insufficient to present a jury issue on gross negligence. The judgment of the trial court is reversed and final judgment is entered in the municipality's favor.

Read More »

WBM, LLC v. WILDWOODS HOLDING CORP.

In a suit seeking specific performance of a contract to sell real estate comprising a corporation's sole asset, the chancellor did not err in striking the plaintiff's evidence and denying specific performance, where the corporation's president lacked authority to sign the contract on its behalf, no corporate resolution authorizing the sale had ever been adopted, and the terms of the contract were unclear, uncertain, incomplete and indefinite. The chancellor's decree is affirmed.

Read More »

COUPLIN v. PAYNE

Code § 5.1-173(B) provides no statutory immunity to an employee of the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority in a personal injury action involving an ambulance driven by the Authority's employee. The trial court erred in sustaining the employee's special plea and dismissing the action. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings.

Read More »

SHIVAEE v. COMMNWEALTH

In considering appeals from two different trial court judgments of civil commitment under Virginia's Sexually Violent Predators Act (SVPA), it is held, contrary to the respondents' arguments in each case, that the SVPA comports with all constitutional requirements of due process and is not unconstitutional. Furthermore, the judgment of one trial court concerning the sufficiency of the evidence with respect to the respondent challenging that court's determination that he was a sexually violent predator was not plainly wrong or without evidence to support it. The judgments of the trial courts are affirmed in both cases.

Read More »

DIXON v. COMMONWEALTH

In a prosecution for driving under the influence of alcohol, driving on a suspended license, and refusing to submit to a breath or blood alcohol test, defendant's statements regarding prior alcohol consumption and operation of the vehicle should have been suppressed. Such statements were made under circumstances where a reasonable person in the defendant?s position would have concluded that his freedom was being curtailed to a degree associated with a formal arrest, and no prior Miranda warnings had been given. The circuit court's judgment is affirmed as to the refusal charge, but the criminal convictions are reversed, with the charges remanded for a new trial if the Commonwealth so elects.

Read More »