<?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; Fairfax Circuit Court</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/fairfax-circuit-court/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 19:12:23 +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>Refusal Right Not Triggered by Transfer&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/refusal-right-not-triggered-by-transfer/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/refusal-right-not-triggered-by-transfer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 17:27:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fairfax Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge R. Terrence Ney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74174</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A restaurant tenant cannot claim its Right of First Refusal has been breached by a transfer of the property from a living trust that took the property upon the owner’s death, to her son, who was the trustee and sole beneficiary of the trust; the Fairfax Circuit Court says the Right of First Refusal was [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/refusal-right-not-triggered-by-transfer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court Has Jurisdiction Under ‘Conspiracy Theory’&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/08/26/court-has-jurisdiction-under-%e2%80%98conspiracy-theory%e2%80%99/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/08/26/court-has-jurisdiction-under-%e2%80%98conspiracy-theory%e2%80%99/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2011 13:27:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fairfax Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Jonathan C. Thacher]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/08/26/court-has-jurisdiction-under-%e2%80%98conspiracy-theory%e2%80%99/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a Virginia drug sales representative’s suit alleging defamation, conspiracy and breach of contract by supervisors at defendant pharmaceutical company, a Fairfax Circuit Court can exercise personal jurisdiction over the company’s regional sales manager in Pennsylvania under the Virginia long-arm statute, and jurisdiction over an HR manager and a training manager in Illinois, under a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/08/26/court-has-jurisdiction-under-%e2%80%98conspiracy-theory%e2%80%99/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IT contractor wins noncompete case&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/08/24/it-contractor-wins-noncompete-case/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/08/24/it-contractor-wins-noncompete-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:02:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alan Cooper</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fairfax Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge R. Terrence Ney]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/08/24/it-contractor-wins-noncompete-case/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Fairfax judge has awarded $172,395 to an information technology company whose former subcontractor went to work for a competitor days after leaving the plaintiff company. The plaintiff, Preferred Systems Solutions Inc., had a contract with the federal government for information technology work. PSS entered into a subcontract with GP Consulting LLC in October 2003 [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/08/24/it-contractor-wins-noncompete-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A different kind of moving violation…&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/27/a-different-kind-of-moving-violation%e2%80%a6/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/27/a-different-kind-of-moving-violation%e2%80%a6/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 10:23:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Paul Fletcher</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fairfax Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Brett A. Kassabian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Michael F. Devine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Traffic Offenses]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/27/a-different-kind-of-moving-violation%e2%80%a6/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A 2010 car crash case on the Beltway in Fairfax County lit up the Internet in Northern Virginia last week when some of the allegations against the defendant were publicized. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant was drunk, speeding at 85 mph and having sex at the time of the crash. Just when most readers [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/27/a-different-kind-of-moving-violation%e2%80%a6/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Jury trial waiver forfeited in scheduling order&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/01/24/jury-trial-waiver-forfeited-in-scheduling-order/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/01/24/jury-trial-waiver-forfeited-in-scheduling-order/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 11:10:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Vieth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ADR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fairfax Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Jan L. Brodie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Leslie Alden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Stanley P. Klein]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Landlord/Tenant]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=59639</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lawyers disillusioned with mandatory arbitration are writing jury waiver clauses into their commercial contracts. But the lawyer must be careful not to waive the client’s contractual right to a bench trial when the lawyer goes to court for a routine scheduling conference, as one Fairfax County lawyer discovered the hard way. The lawyer’s signature on [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/01/24/jury-trial-waiver-forfeited-in-scheduling-order/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Subcontractor for linguists contends regs were ignored &#8211; $2,858,463 Verdict&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/01/03/subcontractor-for-linguists-contends-regs-were-ignored-2858463-verdict/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/01/03/subcontractor-for-linguists-contends-regs-were-ignored-2858463-verdict/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2011 11:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Virginia Lawyers Weekly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Verdicts & Settlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fairfax Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Lorraine Nordlund]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Million-Dollar Verdicts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=59241</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[L-3 Communication Services Inc., the prime contractor to a government contract, refused to pay interim variance indirect rate invoices to a subcontractor, Thomas Computer Solutions LLC (TCS), until the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) conducted a final audit. This stance was contrary to FAR 52.216-7, which allowed for interim rate adjustments prior to contract closeout. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/01/03/subcontractor-for-linguists-contends-regs-were-ignored-2858463-verdict/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Domestic Relations &#8211; Divorce &#8211; Spouse’s Dependent Visa&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/12/30/domestic-relations-divorce-spouse%e2%80%99s-dependent-visa/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/12/30/domestic-relations-divorce-spouse%e2%80%99s-dependent-visa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Dec 2010 14:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fairfax Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Jonathan C. Thacher]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=59203</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Fairfax Circuit Court denies husband’s request for a divorce on the grounds of desertion or a one-year separation, based on his wife’s continued presence in India, because wife contends husband has refused to renew her H-4 Dependent Visa, and she is not allowed to enter the United States to contest the divorce. This case [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/12/30/domestic-relations-divorce-spouse%e2%80%99s-dependent-visa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Contract &#8211; Construction Invoices &#8211; Contract &#8211; Fiduciary Duty&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/10/05/contract-construction-invoices-contract-fiduciary-duty/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/10/05/contract-construction-invoices-contract-fiduciary-duty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Oct 2010 16:03:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fairfax Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Jonathan C. Thacher]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=57574</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A developer of a town home project cannot sue a contractor for breach of fiduciary duty for allegedly submitting invoices for work not completed; the developer has not alleged a tort independent of the alleged breach of contract, says a Fairfax Circuit Court. The developer of the project in the District of Columbia, Rock Creek, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/10/05/contract-construction-invoices-contract-fiduciary-duty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Departing worker took docs, didn’t breach duty&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/08/30/departing-worker-took-docs-didn%e2%80%99t-breach-duty/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/08/30/departing-worker-took-docs-didn%e2%80%99t-breach-duty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2010 11:12:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Paul Fletcher</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fairfax Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Randy I. Bellows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=56736</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Always try to get a noncompete and a nonsolicitation agreement from employees. That’s the take-away for small businesses in the wake of a recently dismissed business tort lawsuit in Fairfax Circuit Court. The case featured two small woman-owned businesses that were competing for government contracts. It had a mother who retired from the first business [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/08/30/departing-worker-took-docs-didn%e2%80%99t-breach-duty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Employees accused of violating Business Conspiracy Act &#8211; $12,900,000 Verdict&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/07/26/employees-accused-of-violating-business-conspiracy-act-12900000-verdict/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/07/26/employees-accused-of-violating-business-conspiracy-act-12900000-verdict/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 11:00:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Virginia Lawyers Weekly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Verdicts & Settlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fairfax Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Leslie M. Alden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Million-Dollar Verdicts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tort]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=56068</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The case involved the actions taken by 21st Century Systems Inc., the two principals of its newly created government contracting division, and two former Perot Systems employees to compete with Perot Systems. While still employed with Perot Systems, the two former employees copied confidential electronic information and worked with the two principals of 21st Century [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/07/26/employees-accused-of-violating-business-conspiracy-act-12900000-verdict/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
