<?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 Dennis W. Shedd</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/judge-dennis-w-shedd/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:26:42 +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>Dental Board Action Violates Antitrust Law&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/06/05/dental-board-action-violates-antitrust-law/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/06/05/dental-board-action-violates-antitrust-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2013 19:16:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Dennis W. Shedd]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74722</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A state agency that regulates the practice of dentistry cannot overturn a Federal Trade Commission decision that the agency’s efforts to shut down teeth-whitening services performed by non-dentists constituted unfair competition that violated federal antitrust law; the 4th Circuit rejects the state dentistry board’s petition for review of the FTC order. The eight-member North Carolina [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/06/05/dental-board-action-violates-antitrust-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Confederate Flag Shirt Ban Upheld&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/29/confederate-flag-shirt-ban-upheld/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/29/confederate-flag-shirt-ban-upheld/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:45:52 +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 Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Dennis W. Shedd]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73468</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 4th Circuit upholds a decision by South Carolina public school officials to prohibit a student from wearing Confederate flag shirts to school, as defendant school officials complied with U.S. Supreme Court requirements for regulating student speech. We conclude the school officials complied with the requirements for regulating student speech as established in Tinker v. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/29/confederate-flag-shirt-ban-upheld/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>60 Months, Not Six, for Dogfighting&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/18/60-months-not-six-for-dogfighting/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/18/60-months-not-six-for-dogfighting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2012 20:29:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Dennis W. Shedd]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71438</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A defendant touted as a “legend” in the dogfighting community cannot overturn his 60-month sentence for violating the Animal Welfare Act; the 4th Circuit says the district court’s assumed error in calculating the sentencing range was harmless, as the court considered the statutory factors and clearly thought defendant deserved 60 months, not six months, in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/18/60-months-not-six-for-dogfighting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No class claim against Equifax, appeals court says&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/03/no-class-claim-against-equifax-appeals-court-says/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/03/no-class-claim-against-equifax-appeals-court-says/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2012 21:44:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Dennis W. Shedd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Roger L. Gregory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Trial Lawyers Association]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71172</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A major credit reporting agency will not face a class action suit by Virginia residents with potentially inaccurate Virginia court judgments on their credit reports. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an order certifying a class in a suit that had the U.S. Chamber of Commerce squaring off against the Virginia Trial Lawyers [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/03/no-class-claim-against-equifax-appeals-court-says/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Judge orders a 20-year ban in trade secrets case&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/09/17/judge-orders-a-20-year-ban-in-trade-secrets-case/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/09/17/judge-orders-a-20-year-ban-in-trade-secrets-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2012 10:37:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Vieth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Albert Diaz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Andre M. Davis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Dennis W. Shedd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=69569</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a rapid volley of court actions, a Korean company fighting a $920 million judgment for theft of trade secrets was hit with a “devastating” 20-year ban on sales of its body armor product, and then promptly won a stay of that injunction from a federal appeals court. Senior U.S. District Judge Robert E. Payne, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/09/17/judge-orders-a-20-year-ban-in-trade-secrets-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>‘Protective Sweep’ Gun is Admissible&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/15/%e2%80%98protective-sweep%e2%80%99-gun-is-admissible/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/15/%e2%80%98protective-sweep%e2%80%99-gun-is-admissible/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 15:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Dennis W. Shedd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search & Seizure]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/15/%e2%80%98protective-sweep%e2%80%99-gun-is-admissible/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Police responding to four quick 911 “domestic” calls relating to a couple they knew did not exceed defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights when, after arresting defendant and making a protective sweep to locate defendant’s 14-year-old autistic brother, they asked the brother where the reported gun was and he pointed to a rifle in a gun rack; [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/15/%e2%80%98protective-sweep%e2%80%99-gun-is-admissible/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Venue Upheld in Child Sex Case&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/03/07/venue-upheld-in-child-sex-case/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/03/07/venue-upheld-in-child-sex-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2012 18:18:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Dennis W. Shedd]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/03/07/venue-upheld-in-child-sex-case/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A defendant who separately met 13- and 17-year-old girls on the Internet and traveled to meet them and have sexual relations with them, including making a video of his sexual encounter with the 17-year-old, properly was prosecuted in Virginia for sexual exploitation of a minor, and the 4th Circuit affirms that conviction and his convictions [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/03/07/venue-upheld-in-child-sex-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Restrictive covenant different from noncompete, court says&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/02/17/restrictive-covenant-different-from-noncompete-court-says/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/02/17/restrictive-covenant-different-from-noncompete-court-says/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 09:29:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Dennis W. Shedd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Leonie Brinkema]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William B. Traxler Jr.]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/02/20/restrictive-covenant-different-from-noncompete-court-says/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An Alexandria federal judge was too quick to pull the trigger on a petroleum distributor’s suit to enforce a restrictive covenant meant to keep a service-station operator from selling a different brand of gasoline. The trial judge awarded summary judgment to the service-station operator, including fees and costs, when BP Products North America Inc. tried [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/02/17/restrictive-covenant-different-from-noncompete-court-says/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court Stresses Standard for Passenger Search&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/11/21/court-stresses-standard-for-passenger-search/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/11/21/court-stresses-standard-for-passenger-search/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 18:53:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Dennis W. Shedd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search & Seizure]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/11/21/court-stresses-standard-for-passenger-search/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Saying it has made the same point in three recent cases, the 4th Circuit reiterates that an officer needs reasonable suspicion that a passenger is armed and dangerous for an officer-safety pat down; a panel majority says defendant’s misrepresentation about his driver’s license and his “priors” for armed robbery did not provide the necessary reasonable [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/11/21/court-stresses-standard-for-passenger-search/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Employer Has Title VII Religious Exemption&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/09/20/employer-has-title-vii-religious-exemption/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/09/20/employer-has-title-vii-religious-exemption/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:06:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Dennis W. Shedd]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/09/20/employer-has-title-vii-religious-exemption/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 4th Circuit says a Catholic nursing-care facility is an exempt religious organization under Title VII that cannot be sued by a geriatric nursing assistant who alleged religious harassment after she refused to abandon her Church of the Brethren dress code that called for long skirts and hair covering. “Employment,” as used throughout Title VII, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/09/20/employer-has-title-vii-religious-exemption/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
