<?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 Melvin R. Hughes Jr.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/judge-melvin-r-hughes-jr/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 13:48:18 +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>Neighbors Must Share Driveway Access&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/neighbors-must-share-driveway-access/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/neighbors-must-share-driveway-access/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 20:01:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Melvin R. Hughes Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richmond Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73954</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this dispute of recent vintage between neighbors over a shared driveway, the Richmond Circuit Court holds that each party is mutually enjoined from unreasonably interfering with the other with respect to access to their respective properties, and neither may block access to the other unreasonably at any particular time. There is no dispute that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/neighbors-must-share-driveway-access/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Driver, Passenger P.I. Suits Severed&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/driver-passenger-p-i-suits-severed/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/driver-passenger-p-i-suits-severed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 20:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Melvin R. Hughes Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Negligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richmond Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73952</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this auto-accident personal injury case, a Richmond Circuit Court grants a motion to sever a plaintiff parent’s case against defendant driver from her son’s case, as the plaintiff parent has an extensive medical history and the plaintiff passenger does not. In light of the extensive medical history discovery has revealed as to plaintiff parent, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/driver-passenger-p-i-suits-severed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Res Judicata Bars One Claim&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/res-judicata-bars-one-claim/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/res-judicata-bars-one-claim/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:58:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Melvin R. Hughes Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richmond Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73950</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Richmond Circuit Court sustains a plea of res judicata as the identity of the parties requirement is met with respect to a fee dispute submitted to the court for decision in February 2010. However, the court overrules the plea as to two other counts that suggest a malpractice claim with respect to defendants in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/res-judicata-bars-one-claim/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Husband Takes Home Debt &amp; Comp Settlement&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/husband-takes-home-debt-comp-settlement/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/husband-takes-home-debt-comp-settlement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:57:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Melvin R. Hughes Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richmond Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73948</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In an equitable distribution proceeding, a Richmond Circuit Court says wife has failed to rebut a presumption that a workers’ comp settlement husband obtained after separation is his separate property, and wife will have no responsibility for debt on the home, which is marital property. The only property subject to equitable distribution is the marital [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/husband-takes-home-debt-comp-settlement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Landlord May Have to Cover Roofer’s Damage&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/landlord-may-have-to-cover-roofers-damage/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/landlord-may-have-to-cover-roofers-damage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:56:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Melvin R. Hughes Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richmond Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73946</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this subrogation case, the Richmond Circuit Court overrules a landlord’s demurrer to a claim that it is ultimately liable for the alleged negligence of defendant roofing company that allegedly caused water and debris damage to the lessee. Generally, a landlord does not have a common law duty to maintain a demised premises that is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/landlord-may-have-to-cover-roofers-damage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Sanction for Foreclosure Complaint&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/no-sanction-for-foreclosure-complaint/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/no-sanction-for-foreclosure-complaint/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:55:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Melvin R. Hughes Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richmond Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73944</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Richmond Circuit Court dismisses plaintiff homeowner’s RICO claim asserted as a basis for setting aside a foreclosure sale, without leave to amend, and denies defendants’ motion to sanction plaintiff under Va. Code § 8.01-271.1 for pursuit of this claim. The underlying facts involve an alleged invalid appointment of a substitute trustee as a basis [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/no-sanction-for-foreclosure-complaint/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Adoption Over Father’s Objection&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/no-adoption-over-fathers-objection/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/no-adoption-over-fathers-objection/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:54:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Melvin R. Hughes Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richmond Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73942</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Richmond Circuit Court denies a husband and wife’s petition to allow the husband to adopt wife’s daughter over the objection of the child’s biological father, as petitioners have not proven by clear and convincing evidence that the biological father abandoned the child or that the adoption would be in the child’s best interests. The [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/no-adoption-over-fathers-objection/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Arbitration Ordered for Warranty Claims&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/arbitration-ordered-for-warranty-claims/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/arbitration-ordered-for-warranty-claims/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:53:30 +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 Melvin R. Hughes Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richmond Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73940</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Although a contract for new home construction states that the warranty of Va. Code § 55-70.1(C) is “specifically waived,” absent contract language indicating the property is sold “as is,” a Richmond Circuit Court overrules defendant builder’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ breach of warranty claim and its pleas of the statute of limitations, but the court [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/arbitration-ordered-for-warranty-claims/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Variance Denial for Billboard Upheld&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/variance-denial-for-billboard-upheld/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/variance-denial-for-billboard-upheld/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 19:41:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Melvin R. Hughes Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richmond Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73793</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the latest round of this years-long dispute over a billboard sign located on the tip of Mayo Island in the city of Richmond, a Richmond Circuit Court upholds a decision by the board of zoning appeals denying appellants’ request for a variance to permit use of the property with the billboard above the applicable [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/variance-denial-for-billboard-upheld/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sanctions Sought for Possible Misjoinder&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/sanctions-sought-for-possible-misjoinder/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/sanctions-sought-for-possible-misjoinder/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 19:39:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal Injury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Melvin R. Hughes Jr.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Negligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richmond Circuit Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Circuit Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73791</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this suit seeking damages for an assisted-living residents for alleged injury from a bed bug infestation, to which plaintiff has added claims for financial mismanagement of funds for plaintiff’s care, a Richmond Circuit Court will take under advisement defendant’s motion for sanctions under Va. Code § 8.01-271.1. Plaintiff, a resident of an assisted living [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/sanctions-sought-for-possible-misjoinder/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
