Written Statement ‘Inadequate’ After 7-Day Trial, Judge Says

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 the matter, this court finds that a written statement of facts is an inadequate substitute for the trial transcript. The judge’s notes in the case are an incomplete record of events and are lacking the specificity required for an adequate record on appeal.

Further, the court finds that plaintiffs’ written statement of facts, including attached exhibits and submitted portions of the trial transcript, is incomplete pursuant to S.Ct. Rule 5;119d0, and fails to accurately represent the full trial record. In particular, the court finds that plaintiffs’ statement of facts shapes the trial record through their submission of selected portions of the trial transcript and limited descriptions of trial testimony. The court sustains defendant’s objections.

Defendant’s statement of errors and deficiencies of the written statement within defendant’s objection accurately sets forth the manner in which plaintiffs’ written statement is deficient. In certifying the manner in which the record is incomplete pursuant to Rule 5:11(d)(4), the court adopts defendant’s statement of errors and deficiencies and incorporates it by reference into this ruling.

Riggins v. Andrews (Lilley, J.) No. CL05-1651, Nov. 12, 2010; Va. Beach Cir.Ct.; C. Allen riggings, Mark C. Nanavati, Todd Fiorella for the parties. VLW 011-8-011, 3 pp.