<?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 Robert E. Payne</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/judge-robert-e-payne/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 20:24:01 +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>Failure-to-Insure Claim Assignment is Valid&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/failure-to-insure-claim-assignment-is-valid/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/failure-to-insure-claim-assignment-is-valid/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 13:17:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74352</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Plaintiff Cincinnati Insurance Company, as assignee of a claim against defendant insurance broker and his agency, may sue those defendants for failure to place property insurance on a property that was damaged by fire after the prior insurance had lapsed; the Richmond U.S. District Court says the assignment is valid. Defendants are broker John Ruch [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/15/failure-to-insure-claim-assignment-is-valid/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Judge needn’t recuse over stock ownership&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/no-post-trial-recusal-for-judges-stock-ownership/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/no-post-trial-recusal-for-judges-stock-ownership/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 13:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Vieth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74219</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A federal judge who ruled on a telecom dispute before realizing he owned stock in one of the telecommunications companies before the court was not required to quit the case, an appeals court panel says. The parties were headed into the home stretch of a complicated contract case under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, tried [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/08/no-post-trial-recusal-for-judges-stock-ownership/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Redress for Claimed Foreclosure Damages&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/no-redress-for-claimed-foreclosure-damages/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/no-redress-for-claimed-foreclosure-damages/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 17:05:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74146</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Property owners who lost their property to foreclosure have not met the case-or-controversy requirement for the Richmond U.S. District Court to exercise jurisdiction over their claims for a loss of equity in the property, rents on the property, inconvenience and damage to their credit record, and the court dismisses their claim alleging the “bogus” appointment [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/03/no-redress-for-claimed-foreclosure-damages/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Claim Against City for Fatal Shooting&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/no-claim-against-city-for-fatal-shooting/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/no-claim-against-city-for-fatal-shooting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 18:07:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Virginia Lawyers Weekly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73772</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A plaintiff suing for the fatal shooting of his son who allegedly was unarmed when a police SWAT team entered a house in which decedent had barricaded himself alone in a bathroom has stated a claim against the two defendant officers but not against the city, and the Richmond U.S. District Court dismisses the § [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/no-claim-against-city-for-fatal-shooting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Title VII Sex-Stereotyping Claim Advances&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/title-vii-sex-stereotyping-claim-advances/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/title-vii-sex-stereotyping-claim-advances/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:58:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73766</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A pro se plaintiff who complained to the management of defendant temporary staffing agency, his employer, about only being assigned to jobs when no one else was available and of being repeatedly subjected to insults and a threat of violence, related to his not conforming to stereotyped male gender norms, has stated gender discrimination and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/16/title-vii-sex-stereotyping-claim-advances/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Minority Contractor’s Race Bias Claim Dismissed&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/10/minority-contractors-race-bias-claim-dismissed/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/10/minority-contractors-race-bias-claim-dismissed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:26:18 +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 Robert E. Payne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73709</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Richmond U.S. District Court dismisses a subcontractor’s suit alleging that various defendant contractors on a state construction contract refused to pay plaintiff because it was a minority-owned contractor, as plaintiff makes only conclusory allegations that do not satisfy the plausibility standard for pleading. The complaint alleges that Trane U.S. Inc. contracted with the Virginia [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/10/minority-contractors-race-bias-claim-dismissed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Profit Disgorgement Expert May Testify&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/10/profit-disgorgement-expert-may-testify/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/10/profit-disgorgement-expert-may-testify/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:17:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sarah Rodriguez</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73706</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In ePlus’ suit against Lawson Software Inc. alleging its illegal sale of certain product configurations within the U.S., the Richmond U.S. District Court denies defendant Lawson’s motion to strike testimony by plaintiff’s expert about disgorgement of profits. On Jan. 27, 2011, a jury returned a verdict of infringement in favor of ePlus Inc. and against [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/10/profit-disgorgement-expert-may-testify/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Former CFO Has SOX Claim for Firing&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/01/former-cfo-has-sox-claim-for-firing/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/01/former-cfo-has-sox-claim-for-firing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 15:23:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73502</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A former chief financial officer for a video game publisher has a Sarbanes-Oxley claim against the company and corporate officers for firing her after she reported to the SEC an alleged effort to inflate company profits; however, the Richmond U.S. District Court dismisses plaintiff’s Dodd-Frank claim because that statute cannot be applied retroactively to afford [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/01/former-cfo-has-sox-claim-for-firing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Local legal rates used for out-of-towners&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/21/local-legal-rates-used-for-out-of-towners/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/21/local-legal-rates-used-for-out-of-towners/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 2013 13:28:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attorneys Fees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73333</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Buy local, when shopping for legal services. Or if you hire pricey out-of-town lawyers, they should be prepared to accept fees on par with what local counsel are paid. When awarding fees, price-sensitive Richmond federal judges already have resisted ordering parties to pay fees in line with hourly charges for lawyers in the Washington, D.C., [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/21/local-legal-rates-used-for-out-of-towners/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Carrier Wins Fees for Email Spoliation&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/20/carrier-wins-fees-for-email-spoliation/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/20/carrier-wins-fees-for-email-spoliation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:30:53 +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 Robert E. Payne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Eastern District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73298</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this multi-million dollar contract case over insurance coverage for mortgage loan losses, a Richmond U.S. District Court awarding attorney’s fees as a sanction for spoliation of evidence says out-of-town lawyers will not get an hourly fee higher than that claimed by Richmond-based lawyers working on the matter, the claimed hours will be reduced by [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/20/carrier-wins-fees-for-email-spoliation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
