<?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 James H. Chamblin</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/judge-james-h-chamblin/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 20:35:53 +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>Loudoun judge approves predictive coding results&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/22/loudoun-judge-approves-predictive-coding-results/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/22/loudoun-judge-approves-predictive-coding-results/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 14:25:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Correy E. Stephenson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James H. Chamblin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=72774</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the first case to approve the use of predictive coding over a party’s objection, a Loudoun Circuit Court judge has signed off on the defense’s computer-assisted review results in a document-heavy case. Computer-assisted review made headlines over the past year after U.S. Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Peck of the Southern District of New York [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/22/loudoun-judge-approves-predictive-coding-results/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Computer-assisted review becomes more popular&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/01/computer-assisted-review-becomes-more-popular/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/01/computer-assisted-review-becomes-more-popular/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 11:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Correy E. Stephenson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James H. Chamblin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=72329</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The pace for adoption of predictive coding in discovery is accelerating, say lawyers familiar with using computers for mass document review. One Virginia court was an early adopter. In April 2012, Loudoun Circuit Judge James H. Chamblin issued a two-page order allowing the use of computer-assisted review over the objection of plaintiff’s counsel, in Global [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/02/01/computer-assisted-review-becomes-more-popular/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Plaintiff may need total knee replacement &#8211; $575,000 Verdict&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/07/plaintiff-may-need-total-knee-replacement-575000-verdict/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/07/plaintiff-may-need-total-knee-replacement-575000-verdict/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 10:34:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Virginia Lawyers Weekly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Verdicts & Settlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James H. Chamblin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/07/plaintiff-may-need-total-knee-replacement-575000-verdict/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This case involved a motor vehicle accident wherein the defendant pulled out from a stop sign into the path of the plaintiff, causing a comminuted tibial plateau fracture. As a result of the fracture, the plaintiff had to undergo a surgical procedure. The plaintiff incurred $53,000 in medical expenses and $9,800 in lost wages. The [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/07/plaintiff-may-need-total-knee-replacement-575000-verdict/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Claim against ER doc in death case struck &#8211; Defense Verdict&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/11/28/claim-against-er-doc-in-death-case-struck-defense-verdict/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/11/28/claim-against-er-doc-in-death-case-struck-defense-verdict/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 11:56:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Virginia Lawyers Weekly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Verdicts & Settlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James H. Chamblin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical Malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Million-Dollar Defense Verdicts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wrongful Death]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/11/23/claim-against-er-doc-in-death-case-struck-defense-verdict/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This was a medical malpractice case involving emergency medical treatment provided to the plaintiff, at the Loudoun Hospital Center on Oct. 30, 2004. At the time of presentation, the ER physician defendant was told that the plaintiff had recently had an artificial insemination procedure. Originally this was the only information the family could give him. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/11/28/claim-against-er-doc-in-death-case-struck-defense-verdict/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Jury needed only 20 minutes to find for doc in med-mal case &#8211; Defense Verdict&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/10/24/jury-needed-only-20-minutes-to-find-for-doc-in-med-mal-case-defense-verdict/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/10/24/jury-needed-only-20-minutes-to-find-for-doc-in-med-mal-case-defense-verdict/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2011 14:31:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Virginia Lawyers Weekly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Verdicts & Settlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James H. Chamblin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical Malpractice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Million-Dollar Defense Verdicts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/10/24/jury-needed-only-20-minutes-to-find-for-doc-in-med-mal-case-defense-verdict/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Plaintiff’s wife underwent surgery to remedy blocked fallopian tubes and remove abdominal adhesions. Defendant physician recommended the surgery to improve the wife’s chances of success with IVF therapy. Another physician, who was not a party to the case, performed the surgery. After the surgery, plaintiff’s wife was discharged home. She then developed a bowel perforation [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/10/24/jury-needed-only-20-minutes-to-find-for-doc-in-med-mal-case-defense-verdict/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lawyer still practicing after suspension, gets longer suspension&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/05/25/lawyer-still-practicing-after-suspension-gets-longer-suspension/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/05/25/lawyer-still-practicing-after-suspension-gets-longer-suspension/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 May 2011 13:47:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alan Cooper</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James H. Chamblin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lawyer Discipline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia State Bar]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/05/25/lawyer-still-practicing-after-suspension-gets-longer-suspension/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board has suspended the license of a Leesburg lawyer for five years because he continued to practice law and accepted a fee without providing services after his license had been suspended administratively. The action against David Redd Young Jr. came at an expedited hearing on May 20. The incident that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/05/25/lawyer-still-practicing-after-suspension-gets-longer-suspension/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ad damnum, defamation cases settled while on appeal&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/01/07/ad-damnum-defamation-cases-settled-while-on-appeal/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/01/07/ad-damnum-defamation-cases-settled-while-on-appeal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 11:51:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alan Cooper</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defamation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James H. Chamblin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James V. Lane]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge William N. Alexander II]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of Virginia News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=59344</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Don’t look for rulings from the Supreme Court of Virginia in the Spear ad damnum case or the much-litigated defamation claim of a former Raytheon Technical Services Co. executive. Both have been settled under confidential terms, less than two weeks before a decision was due in the Raytheon case next Thursday and less than a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/01/07/ad-damnum-defamation-cases-settled-while-on-appeal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Domestic Relations &#8211; Joint Custody &#8211; Couple’s Failure &#8211; Communication&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/02/08/domestic-relations-joint-custody-couple%e2%80%99s-failure-communication/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/02/08/domestic-relations-joint-custody-couple%e2%80%99s-failure-communication/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:25:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James H. Chamblin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=51670</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Where husband can only communicate with wife by e-mail or text messaging, under a JDR court protective order, and he testified he prefers no dialogue with wife and not to communicate with her at all, a Loudoun County Circuit Court concludes that joint custody of the parties’ three minor children would not work, and it [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/02/08/domestic-relations-joint-custody-couple%e2%80%99s-failure-communication/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Domestic Relations &#8211; Equitable Distribution &#8211; Wife’s Gambling&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/02/01/domestic-relations-equitable-distribution-wife%e2%80%99s-gambling/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/02/01/domestic-relations-equitable-distribution-wife%e2%80%99s-gambling/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 01:30:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James H. Chamblin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=51535</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Although husband claimed he began depositing his paycheck in a separate account for household expenses and to prevent wife’s access to pay her gambling debts, a Loudoun County Circuit Court does not find wife’s gambling to be an addiction or even a mental condition that had a monetary effect on the parties’ marital estate. There [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/02/01/domestic-relations-equitable-distribution-wife%e2%80%99s-gambling/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Domestic Relations &#8211; Child Support Change &#8211; Bonus&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/01/25/domestic-relations-child-support-change-bonus/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/01/25/domestic-relations-child-support-change-bonus/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:34:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James H. Chamblin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=51373</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Although husband got a $36,538 bonus in 2008, without a track record on the bonuses and with no word of a 2009 bonus as of the November hearing, a Loudoun County Circuit Court says it will not add a bonus to husband’s income; should husband receive a bonus for 2009, wife can move for modification. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/01/25/domestic-relations-child-support-change-bonus/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
