<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Virginia Lawyers Weekly &#187; Civil Procedure</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/civil-procedure/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 20:24:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Contaminated Steroid Cases Go Back to State Court&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/contaminated-steroid-cases-go-back-to-state-court/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/contaminated-steroid-cases-go-back-to-state-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 13:50:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Samuel G. Wilson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Western District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74370</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Roanoke U.S. District Court remands to state court multiple suits against defendant physicians, a corporation and a pain-management clinic alleging defendants acted negligently, fraudulently and in violation of the Virginia Consumer Protection Act by obtaining a contaminated injectable steroid from the New England Compounding Center and administering it to patients who contracted fungal meningitis. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/contaminated-steroid-cases-go-back-to-state-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Contaminated Steroid Case Remanded to State Court&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/contaminated-steroid-case-remanded-to-state-court/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/contaminated-steroid-case-remanded-to-state-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 13:49:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Samuel G. Wilson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Western District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74367</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Roanoke U.S. District Court remands to state court an estate’s suit against defendant physicians, a corporation and a pain-management clinic alleging defendants acted negligently, fraudulently and in violation of the Virginia Consumer Protection Act by obtaining a contaminated injectable steroid from the New England Compounding Center and administering it to decedent, who died from [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/contaminated-steroid-case-remanded-to-state-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rule changes would deal with discovery&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/10/rule-changes-would-deal-with-discovery/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/10/rule-changes-would-deal-with-discovery/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 May 2013 11:03:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Correy E. Stephenson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74280</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lawyers are concerned that discovery is getting out of hand. The masses of data that are part of everyday operations in modern organizations are generating ever-more complicated discovery demands, even in simple cases. Responding to concern from litigators nationwide, the U.S. Courts’ Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil Procedure recently approved proposed changes to several [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/10/rule-changes-would-deal-with-discovery/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wrongful Death Suit Remanded&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/wrongful-death-suit-remanded/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/wrongful-death-suit-remanded/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 16:14:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James P. Jones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Western District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74247</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Big Stone Gap U.S. District Court remands to state court plaintiff administrator’s wrongful death suit against a health and rehabilitation center. Because plaintiff is a citizen of Virginia, it is now clear that there is no longer complete diversity between plaintiff and each defendant in this case and thus this court no longer has [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/wrongful-death-suit-remanded/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Suit to Invalidate Trust OK in Federal Court&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/suit-to-invalidate-trust-ok-in-federal-court/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/suit-to-invalidate-trust-ok-in-federal-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 16:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge T.S. Ellis III]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74239</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An Alexandria U.S. District Court says the probate exception to federal court jurisdiction does not apply to a suit that seeks to invalidate an inter vivos trust, and it denies plaintiff’s motion to remand this suit back to a Virginia state court. Col. William P. Oliver Jr., U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.), created the William P. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/suit-to-invalidate-trust-ok-in-federal-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fees Awarded in Suit to Enforce Settlement&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/fees-awarded-in-suit-to-enforce-settlement/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/fees-awarded-in-suit-to-enforce-settlement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 16:04:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Claude M. Hilton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74230</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this suit to enforce the parties’ settlement of alleged breaches of an agreement between a Virginia business and a German corporation, the Alexandria U.S. District Court, on remand from the 4th Circuit, awards defendant, as prevailing party, $893,771.64 in attorney’s fees and $55,249.76 in costs. The parties’ 2008 settlement agreement provided that in the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/fees-awarded-in-suit-to-enforce-settlement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fees Reduced for Duplicate Work&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/fees-reduced-for-duplicate-work/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/fees-reduced-for-duplicate-work/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 16:02:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Claude M. Hilton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74228</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the wake of defendant AOL’s $5 million offer to settle class claims by AOL members who allege defendant violated electronic privacy laws by releasing for download 20 million search queries conducted by people using over 600,000 AOL screen names, the Alexandria U.S. District Court declines to award fees in the amount requested by class [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/fees-reduced-for-duplicate-work/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pakistani Forum Not Convenient for Hotel Explosion Suit&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/07/pakistani-forum-not-convenient-for-hotel-explosion-suit/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/07/pakistani-forum-not-convenient-for-hotel-explosion-suit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2013 15:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Roger L. Gregory]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74198</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The family of a former naval commander who worked as a private security contractor and who was killed in a 2008 terrorist bombing at the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad, Pakistan, is entitled to heightened deference to their decision to sue Marriott in a Maryland federal court instead of a Pakistani court, and because the district [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/07/pakistani-forum-not-convenient-for-hotel-explosion-suit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Jurisdiction from Internet Pharmacy Sales&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/07/no-jurisdiction-from-internet-pharmacy-sales/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/07/no-jurisdiction-from-internet-pharmacy-sales/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2013 14:57:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Paul V. Niemeyer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74192</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Defendant foreign banks cannot be sued in a Virginia federal district court for an alleged global cyber-crime conspiracy to collect funds from the sale of illegal counterfeit prescription drugs over the Internet to American consumers; the 4th Circuit affirms dismissal of this suit for injunctive relief for lack of personal jurisdiction over the foreign banks. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/07/no-jurisdiction-from-internet-pharmacy-sales/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Interlocutory Appeal for Claim Dismissal&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/no-interlocutory-appeal-for-claim-dismissal/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/no-interlocutory-appeal-for-claim-dismissal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 17:14:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James P. Jones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74158</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The buyer of a Tazewell business that manufactured mine safety equipment may amend its complaint arising from the sellers’ Distributor Analysis projection of high sales for a key product line, despite allegedly knowing the mines that had not yet installed the technology had contracted with a competitor, but the Abingdon U.S. District Court denies plaintiff’s [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/no-interlocutory-appeal-for-claim-dismissal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
