<?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 Henry Coke Morgan Jr.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/judge-henry-coke-morgan-jr/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 14:27:20 +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>Banking Practices ‘Bad Faith’ Claim Survives&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/banking-practices-bad-faith-claim-survives/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/banking-practices-bad-faith-claim-survives/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 13:42:32 +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 Henry Coke Morgan Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74356</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Plaintiff company, who is suing defendant bank for refusing to honor a Debt Settlement Agreement settling $9 million in debts for $3 million, may sue for breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing by acting in bad faith and against usual and prudent business and banking practices in determining that plaintiff’s [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/banking-practices-bad-faith-claim-survives/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Res Ipsa Loquitur Claim for Elevator Drop&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/no-res-ipsa-loquitur-claim-for-elevator-drop/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/no-res-ipsa-loquitur-claim-for-elevator-drop/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 16:07:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Henry Coke Morgan Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74236</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Norfolk U.S. District Court dismisses a negligence claim filed by a woman who was injured when she stepped into an elevator on the 12th floor of the tower at One Commerce Place in Norfolk, and was injured when the elevator suddenly and violently dropped a number of floors; this court will not extend Virginia [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/no-res-ipsa-loquitur-claim-for-elevator-drop/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Parents Have no Claim for CPS Inquiry&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/parents-have-no-claim-for-cps-inquiry/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/parents-have-no-claim-for-cps-inquiry/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 16:06:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Henry Coke Morgan Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74234</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The parents of a 14-month-old daughter who did not promptly seek medical attention when the child suffered a second-degree burn to her shin as her father held her and her twin sister while riding an all-terrain vehicle, lose their suit alleging malicious prosecution and due process violations arising from their investigation by child protective services [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/parents-have-no-claim-for-cps-inquiry/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Faulty Deportation Leads to Indictment Dismissal&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/faulty-deportation-leads-to-indictment-dismissal/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/faulty-deportation-leads-to-indictment-dismissal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 16:01:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Henry Coke Morgan Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Newport News U.S. District Court dismisses an indictment charging defendant, a Honduran native who originally came to the U.S. in 1987 as a lawful permanent resident, with illegal reentry as a previously deported alien; because defendant’s deportation proceeding was wrongfully conducted in absentia, the court excuses his duty to exhaust his administrative remedies, and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/faulty-deportation-leads-to-indictment-dismissal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Removal before service not allowed&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/08/removal-before-service-not-allowed/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/08/removal-before-service-not-allowed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2013 12:17:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Correy E. Stephenson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Henry Coke Morgan Jr.]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73051</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Defendants seeking to remove a state suit to federal court face some tough case law in the Eastern District of Virginia following a recent decision by U.S. District Judge Henry Coke Morgan, Jr. In Campbell v. Hampton Roads Bankshares Inc. (VLW013-3-101), a Virginia-based defendant sought to remove a case filed in state court, even though [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/08/removal-before-service-not-allowed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Removal Under ‘Forum Defendant Rule’&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/27/no-removal-under-forum-defendant-rule/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/27/no-removal-under-forum-defendant-rule/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:10:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Henry Coke Morgan Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=72917</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Norfolk U.S. District Court says defendant bank may not invoke the “forum defendant rule” to remove this employment contract claim to federal court prior to being served; on an issue that has split the federal courts, this court finds removal is improper since the unserved defendants are citizens of the state in which this [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/27/no-removal-under-forum-defendant-rule/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Venue Change in Ad-Display Patent Case&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/27/no-venue-change-in-ad-display-patent-case/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/27/no-venue-change-in-ad-display-patent-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 15:59:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Henry Coke Morgan Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=72904</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Although all three defendants have their principal places of business in New York, plaintiff, who is trying to protect its patents relating to web-advertising display, is entitled to keep the suit in the Norfolk U.S. District Court because plaintiff’s development, production and marketing of its products have been conducted at its Reston headquarters. The U.S. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/27/no-venue-change-in-ad-display-patent-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Employer Access to Prior Records Limited&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/19/employer-access-to-prior-records-limited/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/19/employer-access-to-prior-records-limited/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2012 19:17:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Henry Coke Morgan Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Labor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=70895</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this overtime-pay case filed by a long-distance truck driver, defendant trucking company may not subpoena the trucker’s employment records from four prior employers, says a Norfolk U.S. District Court; the court grants the motion to quash the subpoenas duces tecum and enters a protective order limiting defendant’s ability to obtain prior employment records. Each [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/19/employer-access-to-prior-records-limited/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Litigation Misconduct for Fee Award&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/10/03/no-litigation-misconduct-for-fee-award/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/10/03/no-litigation-misconduct-for-fee-award/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2012 14:44:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intellectual Property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Henry Coke Morgan Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=69932</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A licensor company that agreed to dismiss as defendants two companies whose use of a patent licensed by the third-party licensee allegedly violated the licensor’s patent does not have to pay attorney’s fees as a sanction under 35 U.S.C. § 285, as the Norfolk U.S. District Court declines to declare this an “Exceptional Case” under [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/10/03/no-litigation-misconduct-for-fee-award/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Personal Jurisdiction from Website Ads&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/07/12/personal-jurisdiction-from-website-ads/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/07/12/personal-jurisdiction-from-website-ads/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:32:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Henry Coke Morgan Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=68309</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Newport News U.S. District Court has personal jurisdiction over a New York defendant whose website advertised on-the-job training programs in Virginia, allegedly using marks and training materials from plaintiff’s company, in violation of the Lanham Act. Plaintiff Jeffrey Nelson is the sole owner and operator of Expert OJT, which provides on-the-job training programs to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/07/12/personal-jurisdiction-from-website-ads/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
