<?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 Leslie L. Lilley</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/judge-leslie-l-lilley/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>Defendant Must Share Statement to Carrier&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/defendant-must-share-statement-to-carrier/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/defendant-must-share-statement-to-carrier/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 13:51:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Leslie L. Lilley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Negligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Beach Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73858</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Virginia Beach Circuit Court grants plaintiff’s motion to compel production of defendant’s recorded statement to her insurance company one day after the subject automobile accident, but declines to rule on plaintiff’s request for defendant’s surveillance video of plaintiff without more facts. The statement at issue was taken by the agent of defendant’s insurance company [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/defendant-must-share-statement-to-carrier/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Fraud Claim On Builder’s Contract&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/08/no-fraud-claim-on-builder%e2%80%99s-contract/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/08/no-fraud-claim-on-builder%e2%80%99s-contract/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 16:44:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Accomack County Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Leslie L. Lilley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/08/no-fraud-claim-on-builder%e2%80%99s-contract/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Accomack Circuit Court applies the “source of duty rule” and says a couple who alleges defendant contractor drew payment but never finished building their new home, may sue for breach of contract, but not for fraudulent inducement. The fraud count alleges the contractor demanded and received an advance of $63,340. Plaintiffs allege the contractor [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/05/08/no-fraud-claim-on-builder%e2%80%99s-contract/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Condo owners pursue structural defect, warranty claims &#8211; $3,248,105 Verdict&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/12/26/condo-owners-pursue-structural-defect-warranty-claims-3248105-verdict/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/12/26/condo-owners-pursue-structural-defect-warranty-claims-3248105-verdict/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2011 11:38:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Virginia Lawyers Weekly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Verdicts & Settlements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Leslie L. Lilley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Million-Dollar Verdicts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Beach Circuit Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/12/26/condo-owners-pursue-structural-defect-warranty-claims-3248105-verdict/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sandbridge Dunes is a 74-unit, four-story condominium building on the oceanfront in Sandbridge. Following three years of fruitless attempts to have the project developer fix leaks and faulty construction in the common areas, the owner’s association retained experts and counsel to pursue statutory warranty claims, seeking over $4,000,000 to repair the defective work. Defects included [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/12/26/condo-owners-pursue-structural-defect-warranty-claims-3248105-verdict/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Written Statement ‘Inadequate’ After 7-Day Trial, Judge Says&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/02/14/written-statement-%e2%80%98inadequate%e2%80%99-after-7-day-trial-judge-says/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/02/14/written-statement-%e2%80%98inadequate%e2%80%99-after-7-day-trial-judge-says/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 17:08:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Leslie L. Lilley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Beach Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=60150</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Virginia Beach Circuit Court rejects a written statement of facts proffered by plaintiffs as inadequate to cover a seven-day trial that included testimony of several expert witnesses, all of which was recorded by a court reporter. Given the length and substance of the case, as well as the availability of a trial transcript of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2011/02/14/written-statement-%e2%80%98inadequate%e2%80%99-after-7-day-trial-judge-says/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Civil Procedure &#8211; Written Statement Of Facts &#8211; Defendant’s Objections&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/24/civil-procedure-written-statement-of-facts-defendant%e2%80%99s-objections/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/24/civil-procedure-written-statement-of-facts-defendant%e2%80%99s-objections/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Nov 2010 17:03:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Leslie L. Lilley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Beach Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=58654</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After a seven-day trial that included testimony from several expert witnesses, all recorded by a court reporter, a Virginia Beach Circuit Court says plaintiff’s written statement of facts is inadequate, and the court sustains defendant’s objections. The case upon which the written statement of facts has been filed consisted of seven days of trial, including [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2010/11/24/civil-procedure-written-statement-of-facts-defendant%e2%80%99s-objections/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
