<?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; Judge Burke McCahill</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/judge-burke-mccahill/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 14:57:25 +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>Contract case tests birth-injury coverage&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/28/contract-case-tests-birth-injury-coverage/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/28/contract-case-tests-birth-injury-coverage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2012 14:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Vieth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Burke McCahill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Thomas D. Horne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical Malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of Virginia News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71062</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court of Virginia has agreed to consider whether a medical malpractice insurance policy covers a doctor’s failure to participate in the Virginia birth injury fund as promised to the mother. The coverage dispute arises out of an emotionally wrought case where the distraught mother confronted the doctor and his wife, threatening a violent [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/28/contract-case-tests-birth-injury-coverage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Claim Time-Barred for ‘Necessary Party’&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/05/claim-time-barred-for-necessary-party/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/05/claim-time-barred-for-necessary-party/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:05:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Burke McCahill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=70511</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A subcontractor who sued the general contractor for failure to pay and the surety on the general contractor’s bond should name the general contractor as a necessary party to the suit on the bond, but the surety’s demurrer is sustained because the sub is time-barred from amending its complaint to add the general contractor as [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/05/claim-time-barred-for-necessary-party/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Noncompete Suit Goes Forward&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/01/27/noncompete-suit-goes-forward/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/01/27/noncompete-suit-goes-forward/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:35:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Burke McCahill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/01/27/noncompete-suit-goes-forward/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this litigation over a noncompete clause, the Loudoun County Circuit Court declines to reconsider its decision overruling demurrers to two counts of plaintiff employer’s complaint, in light of the recent ruling in Home Paramount. Defendants asked the court to reconsider its ruling with respect to two counts of plaintiff’s complaint in light of the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/01/27/noncompete-suit-goes-forward/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Man accused of shoplifting alleges assault by Walmart &#8211; $282,000 Verdict&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/06/man-accused-of-shoplifting-alleges-assault-by-walmart-282000-verdict/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/06/man-accused-of-shoplifting-alleges-assault-by-walmart-282000-verdict/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 09:54:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Virginia Lawyers Weekly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Verdicts & Settlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Burke McCahill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/06/man-accused-of-shoplifting-alleges-assault-by-walmart-282000-verdict/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The plaintiff alleged that in May 2009, he and a male companion, both of whom are Hispanic and were about 20 years of age at the time, were unjustly followed and monitored by security guards as they shopped at the Sterling Walmart store. When the two attempted to leave the store, two security guards and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/06/man-accused-of-shoplifting-alleges-assault-by-walmart-282000-verdict/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Shoplifting accusation by guards costs $282K&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/02/man-accused-of-shoplifting-wins-against-walmart/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/02/man-accused-of-shoplifting-wins-against-walmart/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 14:10:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alan Cooper</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Burke McCahill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/02/shoplifting-suspect-wins-against-walmart/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Loudoun County jury has awarded $282,000 to a young Hispanic man who alleged security guards at a Walmart store in Sterling accosted him and falsely accused him of shoplifting. Daniel Campos and a friend, Jose Platero, testified that a security guard started following them as soon as they entered the store in May 2009. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/06/02/man-accused-of-shoplifting-wins-against-walmart/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supplier Can Sue to Enforce Mechanic’s Lien&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/03/14/supplier-can-sue-to-enforce-mechanic%e2%80%99s-lien/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/03/14/supplier-can-sue-to-enforce-mechanic%e2%80%99s-lien/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2011 15:51:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Burke McCahill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=60831</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a supplier’s suit to enforce a mechanic’s lien against homeowners, the homeowners cannot demur to the suit based on the language of an earlier commercial account application between the supplier of construction materials and the builder for defendants, says a Loudoun County Circuit Court. Plaintiff supplied building materials to Foster, a builder for defendants. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/03/14/supplier-can-sue-to-enforce-mechanic%e2%80%99s-lien/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
