The Most Important Opinions: January-June 2024

This week, Virginia Lawyers Weekly presents a compilation of the Most Important Opinions from January to June 2024. You’ll find more than 100 cases highlighted below.

“Important Opinions” appear both on our website and in our print edition each week. These are the cases chosen by our editors as most likely to impact law practice or a given subject area of law.

ADMINISTRATIVE

Administrative – Workers’ comp benefits
When an employee fell while turning to speak with a coworker while on the premises of her employer, she was denied workers’ compensation benefits. The employee did not establish by a preponderance of the evidence that her accident was “caused by any work related risk or significant work related exertion.” O’Brien v. Northern Virginia Community College, VLW 024-7-151 (7 pp.)(unpublished opinion)

Administrative – ‘Treating source’ opinions
Where the opinions of a “treating source” were consistently supported by the medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic information provided in the records, they were entitled to controlling weight by the administrative law judge. The ALJ thus erred by failing to articulate a “good reason,” supported by substantial evidence in the record, for according little weight to the physician’s opinions. Easterbrook v. Kijakazi, VLW 023-2-274 (20 pp.)

APPEALS

Appeals – Rule 1:1A
Where prevailing parties argued that they were “entitled” to appellate attorney’s fees under Rule 1:1A, because they were awarded fees in the circuit court, their argument was rejected. Rule 1:1A permits, but does not mandate, a prevailing appellee’s recovery of appellate attorney fees, costs or both. Brant v. Schneider, VLW 024-7-155 (8 pp.)(unpublished opinion)

ARBITRATION

Arbitration – Agreement to arbitrate
Where a woman suing a manufacturer for its allegedly defective recreation vehicle alleged that she was not provided copies of a warranty containing the arbitration provision; was aware there was a warranty, but was not aware of its contents, including the arbitration provision and would not have signed the arbitration agreement if she was aware of it, a jury will decide if she agreed to the arbitration provision.  Anderson v. Ford Motor Company, VLW 024-3-112 (12 pp.)

Arbitration – Arbitrability issues
Where a participant in a “Candy Crush” tournament sued the developer and affiliated companies for fraud, but the game’s terms of use clearly and unmistakably delegated to the arbitrator the exclusive authority to decide certain arbitrability issues, the arbitrator will decide whether the claims are subject to arbitration. Montoya v. King.com Limited, VLW 024-3-233 (22 pp.)

Arbitration – Discrimination claims
Where a former employee alleged his discrimination claims against his former employer were subject to arbitration under his Employment Agreement, but nowhere in the agreement did the parties address discrimination, the motion to compel was denied. Tiedeman v. EyeOne PLC, VLW 024-3-265 (14 pp.)

Arbitration – Non-arbitrable claim
Where the court previously held that all claims except one were subject to arbitration, it refused to stay the non-arbitrable claim pending resolution of the arbitration. Hetrick v. IINK Corp., VLW 024-3-217 (16 pp.)

Arbitration – Sole LLC member
Where the sole member of an LLC asserted a defamation claim against another company, that claim was not subject to arbitration because the member was not a signatory to that agreement. Hetrick Companies LLC v. IINK Corp., VLW 024-3-007 (39 pp.)

BANKING

Banking – HELOC loans
Where a woman alleged a bank allowed her ex-husband to take out $350,000 in loans under a home equity line of credit on her house, and then failed to respond to dispute letters in compliance with the law, she plausibly alleged claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Barnes v. USAA Federal Savings Bank, VLW 024-3-289 (16 pp.)

BANKRUPTCY

Bankruptcy – Fraudulently transferred funds
Where the liquidating trustee traced almost $1.4 million transferred from the bankruptcy estate to two churches through intermediaries, judgments were entered against the churches. Allowing the trustee of a bankruptcy estate to recover proceeds of avoided and avoidable transfers from initial, immediate and mediate transferees, even where such transferees are qualified charitable or religious institutions, is not “absurd.” Arrowsmith v. Christian Life Assembly of South Carolina, South Carolina Inc., VLW 024-4-020 (42 pp.)

Bankruptcy – Nondischargeable debt
Where the debtor previously promised to pay a woman he assaulted $415,000 in installments, the outstanding amount owed, as well as the fees incurred in collecting on the settlement agreement and contesting the debtor’s bankruptcy proceedings, were non-dischargeable as debt incurred “for willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity.” Yagi v. Hilgartner, VLW 024-2-028 (18 pp.)

Bankruptcy – Personal property exemption
Where the debtor claimed, pursuant to Virginia Code § 34-13, the unused portion of her Virginia Code § 34-4 exemption in personal property, even though the personal property is not used as her primary residence, the Chapter 13 trustee’s objections were overruled. Virginia Code § 34-13 contains no limitation to real or personal property used as the principal residence of the householder. In re: Nicole J. Poullath, VLW No. 024-4-012 (10 pp.)

Bankruptcy – Trustee intervention
Where the trustee moved to intervene in a suit by the only creditor, alleging the debt was non-dischargeable because it was obtained by fraud or larceny, the motion to intervene was denied. The trustee failed to show an interest in the subject matter of the action within meaning of the law. Advancial Federal Credit Union v. Par Cruz, VLW 023-4-023 (14 pp.)

Bankruptcy – Voluntary 401k contributions
Where a dispute arose over whether the debtor could voluntarily increase his contributions to his 401k plan, the court established a rule for the public and the bar the greater of: (a) 100% of the debtor’s previous contributions or (b) the amount of an employer’s matching contributions. In re Parquet, VLW No. 024-4-005 (11 pp.)

BUSINESS LAW

Business Law – Competing appraisals
Where there were two different appraisals of a surgical center’s value, the trial court erred by deciding which of them to use to determine the value of shares held by a physician who wanted to withdraw from practice and redeem his shares. Fredericksburg Ambulatory Surgery Center v. Massey III, VLW 024-7-033 (9 pp.)

CIVIL PRACTICE

Civil Practice – Adverse witness inference
Where the circuit court found an adverse witness’ testimony was “inherently incredible,” but nevertheless held the party that called him was bound by his testimony, it erred. When a party has called an adverse witness, their testimony is usually “‘binding’ on the calling party,” if it is “uncontradicted and is not inherently improbable.” J&R Enterprises v. Ware Creek Real Estate Corp., VLW 024-7-126 (6 pp.)

Civil Practice – Attorneys’ fees
Where plaintiff seeks attorney fees in connection with defendant’s motion to modify child support, plaintiff’s claim is denied. The parties’ marital settlement agreement does not create a contractual right to fees and plaintiff has not presented a statutory basis to award such fees. Kellog v. Kellog, VLW 024-8-002 (8 pp.)

Civil Practice – Attorneys’ fees
Where appellants prevailed on some of their claims after a remand from the Virginia Supreme Court, the trial court incorrectly reduced their attorney fee award because it did not consider the “relative degree of success” appellants obtained. The circuit court incorrectly denied appellants’ claim for attorney fees incurred for an appeal. Sainani, et al. v. Belmont Glen Homeowners Ass’n, VLW 024-7-016 (21 pp.)

Civil Practice – Attorneys’ fees
Where a prevailing party filed her request for attorney’s fees, incurred in responding to an unsuccessful appeal by the other party, more than 30 days from the date the Supreme Court of Virginia’s order denying the appeal, it was filed too late. Sidar v. Doe, VLW 024-7-118 (7 pp.)

Civil Practice – Conversion verdict
Where appellant left his car with a repair shop and a part owner of the shop filed an online form to initiate the abandoned-vehicle process, eventually obtaining title in his own name, the Court of Appeals erred by reversing a jury’s conversion verdict. McCants v. CD & PB Enterprises d/b/a/ Maaco, et al., VLW 024-6-005 (14 pp.)

Civil Practice – Deposition transcript fees
Where a company sued by its former employee obtained deposition transcripts in order to review the employee’s summary judgment evidence and argument, the fees for those transcripts were recoverable via a bill of costs after the company prevailed on the claims. Morris v. Taylor Communications Secure & Customer Solutions Inc., VLW 024-3-059 (6 pp.)

Civil Practice – Employment contract
Where a six-month employment contract between appellant school board and appellee provided him with a $35,284 salary “prorated for the duration of the contract,” the trial court correctly rejected the board’s argument that the salary should be prorated on an annual basis. School Board for the City of Richmond v. Lee Jr., VLW 023-7-468 (22 pp.)

Civil Practice – False Claims Act investigation
Where the federal government deposed a company’s former CEO and a current executive as part of an ongoing False Claims Act investigation, and the company then produced additional documents to the government in response civil investigative demands, the government may depose these executives a second time. United States v. Sentara Healthcare, VLW 024-3-138 (16 pp.)

Civil Practice – Free exercise claim
Where a teacher claims he was discharged for not following, on religious grounds, a directive concerning the use of personal pronouns in reference to a transgender student, the trial court incorrectly dismissed his claims for violation of his free exercise and free speech rights, his right to due process, his rights under the Virginia Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or VRFRA, and his claim for breach of contract. Vlaming v. West Point School Board, et al., VLW 023-6-031 (143 pp.)

Civil Practice – Injunctive relief
Where a litigant is otherwise entitled to injunctive relief, the fact that a declaratory judgment action is pending does not prevent a circuit court from awarding that relief. The statute only precludes injunctive relief when the only basis for the injunction is the mere fact that a declaratory judgment action is pending. Leggett v. The Sanctuary at False Cape Condominium Association Inc., VLW 024-6-017 (6 pp.)

Civil Practice – Jury instruction
Where the Court of Appeals effectively ruled that the proponent of a jury instruction must argue the specific grounds and relevant facts for the instruction at the time it is proffered in order to preserve the challenge for an appeal, it erred. During the jury instruction phase of trial, counsel is not required to supply the trial court with specific facts in support of proffered instructions when the trial court is already aware of a party’s legal position and the applicable facts in evidence. Emergency Physicians of Tidewater, PLC v. Hanger, VLW 024-6-011 (12 pp.)

Civil Practice – Legal malpractice claim
Where the parties signed a written engagement letter, which provided that appellee attorney would file a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition for appellant and obtain confirmation of the reorganization plan, that “particular undertaking” was concluded when the matter was converted to a Chapter 7 proceeding. Smith Development, Inc. v. Conway, et al., VLW 024-7-001 (21 pp.)

Civil Practice – Mitigation instruction
Where plaintiff developed a post-operative infection in her wrist, which defendants say was caused by soaking her wrist despite being told not to, the trial court correctly refused to instruct the jury on mitigation of damages. Rodrigue, M.D., et al. v. Butts-Franklin, VLW 024-7-031 (12 pp.)

Civil Practice – Necessary party
Where a man sued his sister over rights under powers of attorney alleged executed by their mother, the mother was a necessary party to the suit. Because she could not be joined without destroying diversity jurisdiction, the suit was remanded to the circuit court. Neal v. Neal, VLW 023-3-774 (4 pp.)

Civil Practice – Process server fees
Where a company was granted judgment on the former employee’s disability claims, and it then sought to recover fees charged by private process servers to serve subpoenas to obtain the former employee’s medical records, those fees were not recoverable. Keith v. Volvo Group North America LLC, VLW 024-3-058 (8 pp.)

Civil Practice – Purposeful availment
Where a North Carolina-based medical provider’s relevant contacts were limited to responding to text messages, emails and telephone calls initiated while the plaintiff was in Virginia, it did not purposefully avail itself of the privilege of conducting activities in Virginia. Carter v. Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, VLW 024-6-020 (13 pp.)

Civil Practice – Retaliation
Where a fact finder could find that a nurse practitioner stopped an inmate’s mental health medications after an argument between the two, the inmate’s failure to provide adequate mental health care and retaliation claims survived the nurse’s motion to dismiss. Bristol v. Anderson, VLW 024-3-139 (20 pp.)

Civil Practice – Request for accounting
Where a woman sought an accounting from the attorney representing her aunt because she believed that he was mismanaging her affairs, the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying her petition.  Williams v. Boggess, VLW 024-7-112 (7 pp.)

Civil Practice – School Anti-Racism Policy
Where parents, whose children were students in the Albemarle County school system, alleged that the county school board enacted an Anti-Racism Policy that violated their state constitutional and statutory rights, “a majority of this panel concludes that the circuit court was correct to dismiss each claim in the Complaint.” Ibanez, et al. v. Albemarle County School Board, et al., VLW 024-7-056 (100 pp.)

Civil Practice – Sudden emergency instruction
Where appellee rear-ended appellant’s vehicle, the jury’s verdict for appellee in this personal injury case is affirmed. The trial court properly instructed the jury on the sudden emergency doctrine. Further, the evidence supports the jury’s determination that appellee was faced with a sudden emergency. Boyette v. Sprouse, VLW 024-7-018 (12 pp.)

Civil Practice – Victim anonymity
Where a woman sued a man for sexually assaulting her, the district court erred by ordering the woman to use her real name going forward. Doe v. Sidar, VLW 024-2-062 (17 pp.)

Civil Practice – Virginia’s Fair Housing Law
The Viginia Real Estate Board cannot enforce the portion of Virginia’s Fair Housing Law, or VFHL, that creates a presumption of illegal preference if “words or symbols associated with a particular religion, national origin, sex, or race” are used in published materials. Plaintiff realtor used religious references in her emails and website. Enforcing the provision “amounts to an infringement of her protected activity of expression under the First Amendment[.]” Carter v. Virginia Real Estate Board, VLW 024-8-005 (13 pp.) (memorandum opinion)

Civil Practice – Voluntary nonsuit
Even though appellant nonsuited his claim arising from a traffic accident, the court had jurisdiction to issue a default judgment in the insurer’s favor regarding a coverage question. Rosson v. Erie Ins. Exchange, VLW 023-7-476 (13 pp.)

CIVIL PROCEDURE

Civil Procedure – Discovery stay standard
Where a party seeks to stay discovery pending resolution of potentially dispositive motions, the court should consider: (1) whether the movant suffer significant harm by the continuation of discovery and, if so, (2) is the movant likely to succeed on the merits, (3) does the balance of the hardships favor a discovery stay and (4) does any public interest support the stay. Son v. Benson, VLW 024-8-043 (8 pp.)

CIVIL RIGHTS

Civil Rights – Due process
Where the district court held that a former professor waited too long before asserting due process claims against James Madison University and officials, arising out of how it handled sexual harassment allegations made against her, but the suit was filed within two years from the date that the provost issued a “final,” non-appealable decision, the suit was timely. Reid v. James Madison University, VLW 024-2-020 (22 pp.)

Civil Rights – Sheriff liability
Where Spotsylvania deputies arrested a man who to provide identification upon request and charged him with obstruction of justice, they violated the man’s Fourth Amendment rights. A jury will decide if the sheriff is liable for his deputies’ violations. Stout v. Harris, VLW 024-3-153 (11 pp.)

Civil Rights – Strip search
Where prison officials argued they were entitled to qualified immunity for claims brought by a contract jail nurse who was strip searched after she was mistaken for an inmate, but the officials’ “mistake” was not reasonable, their immunity motions were denied. Amisi v. Brooks, VLW 024-2-066 (25 pp.)

Civil Rights – Qualified immunity
Where the driver of a vehicle alleged a police officer made death threats after the driver questioned the reasons for a traffic stop, the officer was not entitled to qualified immunity. Nazario v. Gutierrez, VLW 024-2-143 (49 pp.)

COMMERCIAL

Commercial – Property damage
Where bailment and negligence claims were filed against a company responsible for transporting property that was fatally damaged while being stored in a warehouse, but the claims were preempted by federal law, they were dismissed with prejudice. Lotte Insurance Co. Ltd. v. R.E. Smith Enterprises Inc., VLW 024-3-268 (48 pp.)

CONSTITUTIONAL

Constitutional – Background check requirement
Where a woman alleged a Virginia statute violated the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses by disqualifying her for a substance-abuse counselor position in a state-licensed facility because of her two-decades-old conviction for robbery, these claims survived the Commonwealth’s motion to dismiss. Brown v. Smith, VLW 024-3-301 (18 pp.)

Constitutional – First Amendment
Where the record showed that the University of Virginia School of Medicine expelled a student because of his “confrontational, threatening, behavior,” and not because of his speech, the school prevailed on the former student’s First Amendment retaliation claim. Bhattacharya v. Murray, VLW 024-2-070 (57 pp.)

Constitutional – Social media blocking
Where a man sued the Lynchburg Police Department after it allegedly blocked him on Facebook and Instagram, but the police department is not an entity subject to suit under state law, and the allegations failed to establish a viable municipal-liability claim, the suit was dismissed. Santiago v. Lynchburg Police Dep’t, VLW 024-3-075 (8 pp.)

CONSUMER LAW

Consumer Law – Unvalidated debt
The trial court erred when it determined that appellant was liable for a debt because appellee debt collector lacked standing to sue. This is so because appellee “did not provide or identify any information that showed that it had any ‘substantial legal rights’ that would be affected — namely, that [appellee] owned a debt owed by [appellant].” The circuit court’s ruling for appellee is reversed. Green v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, VLW 024-7-058 (30 pp.)

CONSUMER PROTECTION

Consumer Protection – Fair Credit Reporting Act
Where a student loan servicer sued for allegedly violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act argued that it was immune from suit because it was an arm of the state, its argument was rejected. Neither Supreme Court precedent nor Fourth Circuit authority supported the servicer’s position. Pellegrino v. Equifax Information Services LLC, VLW 024-3-003 (18 pp.)

Consumer Protection – Fraud
Where homeowners alleged their general contractor falsely represented that he employed only licensed subcontractors, and they submitted affidavits stating they would not have entered into the contract if they knew this statement was false, the district court wrongly granted summary judgment to the contractor on this claim. Harrell v. DeLuca, VLW 024-2-100 (22 pp.)

Consumer Protection – Identity theft
Where a woman alleged mortgage companies ignored or timely failed to respond to multiple notifications that she was the victim of identify theft, she plausibly alleged claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Muniz v. Freedom Mortgage Corporation, VLW 024-3-142 (26 pp.)

Consumer Protection – Online purchase
Where a man sued Home Depot for damages arising from his online purchase of a bathtub, but the court dismissed the federal cause of action, and the amount is controversy was less than the jurisdictional requirement for diversity jurisdiction, the suit was remanded to state court. Kruglyak v. Home Depot USA Inc., VLW 024-3-183 (22 pp.)

Consumer Protection – Overdraft fees
Where a credit union moved to dismiss a putative class action over its overdraft fee policy, but the contract was ambiguous on whether the credit union’s practice was allowed, its motion to dismiss was denied. Virginia is for Movers LLC v. Apple Federal Credit Union, VLW 024-3-146 (30 pp.)

Consumer Protection – Wrongfully repossessed vehicle
Where an auto dealership wrongfully repossessed a woman’s vehicle because of a dispute between the dealership owner and the woman’s then-boyfriend over drug money, the woman prevailed on her conversion and Virginia Uniform Commercial Code claims. Shelton v. Marshall, VLW 024-3-150 (23 pp.)

CONTRACT

Contract – Block billing
Where a defendant prevailed in a breach of contract and conspiracy suit, he was awarded over $230,000 in attorney’s fees and costs. Although the losing party claimed the fees should be reduced because of instances of block billing, the cumulative hours billed for each entry were reasonable in light of the various tasks listed therein. Colonial River Wealth Advisors LLC v. Cambridge Investment Research Inc., VLW 024-3-020 (26 pp.)

Contract – Insurance coverage
Where the owner of a beach house alleged the defendant failed to procure sufficient insurance to cover a loss, the defendant’s motion to dismiss the breach of contract and tort claims was denied. 5006 Ocean Front Avenue LLC v. AssuredPartners of Virginia LLC, VLW 024-3-297 (9 pp.)

Contract – Landlord’s duty to mitigate
Where a tenant’s apartment was infested with fleas, it was the landlord’s duty to mitigate the problem, even though the lease purported to shift that responsibility to the tenant. Under the Virginia Residential Landlord Tenant Act, tenants are entitled to a warranty of habitability, which the parties cannot waive. Parrish v. Vance, VLW 024-7-080 (19 pp.)

Contract – Limitation of damages clause
Where a contractor moved to enforce a limitations of damages clause in a subcontract, its request was denied because the clause was null and void under Virginia Code § 1-4.1:1. BAE Systems Ordnance Systems Inc. v. Fluor Federal Solutions LLC, VLW 024-3-051 (13 pp.)

Contract – Long-term disability benefits
Where an insurance carrier wrongfully stopped paying a woman’s long-term disability benefits, she was awarded benefits from the date of termination. Wonsang v. Reliance Standard Insurance Company, VLW 024-3-223 (30 pp.)

Contract – Marital separation agreement
Where the parties agreed in a marital separation agreement that the wife “shall have 50% of” husband’s “military retirement, when a military retirement is earned by” husband, that referred to the marital share interest that already existed at the time the agreement was executed, and not to military retirement earned because of military service after the parties’ divorce. Younkle v. Schillmoeller, VLW 024-6-013 (5 pp.)

Contract – Mutual mistake
Where parties entered a real estate lease without knowledge of a government ordinance that required closure of a portion of the real property, that constituted a mutual mistake of material fact justifying rescission of the lease. Meredith Investment Partners LP v. Houssni, et al., VLW 024-8-028. (5 pp.)

Contract – Sovereign immunity
Where a company sued the Commonwealth of Virginia for breach of contract, the circuit court erred by concluding that sovereign immunity barred all counts. Sovereign immunity has no application in actions based upon valid contracts entered into by duly authorized agents of the government. Montalla LLC v. Commonwealth of Virginia, VLW 024-6-019 (23 pp.)

Contract – Subrogation rights
Where an insurer fully paid an underinsured motorist claim and thus acquired statutory subrogation rights, those rights are exclusive to the insurer. When the insurer chose not to exercise those rights, this did not entitle appellant insured to collect an additional payment from the appellee. Brown v. Kirkpatrick, VLW 023-7-477 (29 pp.)

Contract – Termination for convenience clause
Where a party could terminate a services agreement for convenience without being obligated to continue payments, and it did so, it prevailed on the breach of contract claim. First Bank Chicago v. American Electric Power Service Corporation, VLW 024-3-269 (15 pp.)

CRIMINAL

Criminal – Expert assistance
Where appellee sought to introduce expert testimony to bolster his claim that he falsely confessed to several sex crimes due to his mental state, the Court of Appeals incorrectly reversed appellee’s convictions. The Court of Appeals erred by ruling that the trial court abused its discretion in ruling on appellant’s requests for expert assistance. Commonwealth v. Smith, VLW 024-6-007 (23 pp.)

Criminal – Jury verdicts
Where a man was acquitted of second-degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of a murder, but was convicted of unlawfully discharging a firearm into an occupied building and unlawful destruction of property, the verdicts were not inconsistent. Barnes v. Commonwealth, VLW 024-7-125 (13 pp.)

Criminal – License plate reader
Where the collection and storage of license plate and location information by a 172-camera automatic license plate reader system used by the Norfolk Police Department constitutes a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, photographs of the defendant’s vehicle were suppressed because they were obtained without a warrant. Commonwealth v. Bell, VLW 024-8-039 (5 pp.)

Criminal – Photo identification
Where an attempted robbery victim identified the perpetrator from a photograph the police showed him shortly after the attempt, this single photo identification was not impermissibly suggestive. Sample Jr. v. Commonwealth, VLW 024-6-004 (16 pp.) 

Criminal – Probable cause
Where appellant agreed to let the police search him for weapons, this was not permission to conduct a generalized search. A search of his pockets exceeded the scope of the permission. Carter v. Commonwealth, VLW 023-7-482 (16 pp.)

Criminal – Renegotiated plea agreement
Where the Commonwealth and defendant agreed to a new plea agreement after their first plea agreement was neither accepted nor rejected by the trial court, the trial court erred when it convicted the defendant under the first plea agreement. A trial court cannot enforce and ratify an agreement when there is no longer mutual assent. Thomas v. Commonwealth, VLW 024-6-021 (14 pp.)

Criminal – Warrantless private area search
Where police reached inside appellant’s underwear without a warrant to extract an object while he “resisted by clenching his posterior[,]” his motion to suppress the drugs contained in a plastic bag should have been granted because there were no exigent circumstances to justify the search. Hubbard v. Commonwealth, VLW 024-7-082 (21 pp.)

DAMAGES

Damages – Jury award
Where the district court reduced a jury’s damages award by almost half because it resulted from the jury improperly mixing expert testimony, it erred. A jury may accept or reject any part of an expert’s testimony and remain within the range of credited testimony even if it does not adopt any one expert’s testimony wholesale. Mountain Valley Pipeline LLC v. 8.37 acres of land owned by Frank Terry, John Coles Terry, and Elizabeth Terry, VLW 024-2-132 (19 pp.)

Damages – Offset
Where an insurance company claimed it could offset and reduce long-term disability benefits by the amount a beneficiary was receiving from Social Security, this argument failed. The plan did not permit offsetting the man’s Social Security benefits because they resulted from his earned income, rather than his disability. Aisenberg v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co., VLW 024-3-276 (17 pp.)

DOMESTIC RELATIONS

Domestic Relations – Pre-retirement income
Where the trial court imputed husband’s entire pre-retirement income to him on the basis that he had voluntarily retired and that “the parties had inadequate retirement savings to support their spending[,]” the court abused its discretion by denying husband’s motion to reduce or end his support obligation to wife. Baker v. Baker, VLW 024-7-084 (9 pp.)

Domestic Relations – SSI benefits
Where a disabled child receives supplemental security income, those benefits are not an “independent financial resource” that may justify a reduction in a parent’s child-support obligation. Humphries v. Buchanan, VLW 024-7-141 (36 pp.)

EDUCATION

Education – Due process rights
Where a former graduate student at Virginia Tech alleged that he was given only 24 hours’ notice of a disciplinary hearing, and that the university denied his request for a continuance, which affected his ability to prepare his defense, he plausibly alleged a due process claim against the university president and a university director. Doe v. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, VLW 024-3-211 (36 pp.)

EMPLOYMENT

Employment – Age discrimination
Where a former bank executive alleged that he was terminated because of his age, but the record reflected his “lack of qualifications and unsatisfactory work performance,” and that he had disclosed non-public personal information of the bank’s customers, the bank prevailed on the claims. Kendrick v. Carter Bank & Trust Inc., VLW 024-3-199 (32 pp.)

Employment – Attorneys’ fees
Where plaintiffs who settled their unpaid wages claim against a steakhouse sought to recover $367,406.25 in attorneys’ fees, this amount was reduced to $294,974.61 because of block billing, clerical tasks, redundancy, time spent on voluntarily dismissed claims and overall success. Carroll v. Northampton Restaurant Inc., VLW 024-3-172 (35 pp.)

Employment – COVID-19 vaccination
Where employees failed to demonstrate that Inova’s policy required them to take a vaccine that was “developed or tested using aborted fetal cell lines,” Inova prevailed on their Title VII failure-to-accommodate religious belief claims. Ellison v. Inova Health Care Services, VLW 024-3-225 (17 pp.)

Employment – Discrimination and retaliation
Where a woman alleged the company’s chief executive officer terminated her employment because the woman was receiving workers’ compensation benefits, a jury will decide if the company discriminated and retaliated against the woman. Boelte v. Southstone Behavioral Health, VLW 024-3-074 (18 pp.)

Employment – Discrimination and retaliation
Where a Virginia State University professor alleged that she was treated differently and paid less than her male colleagues, and that she was denied a promotion, her discrimination and retaliation claims survived the university’s motion to dismiss. Robertson v. Virginia State University, VLW 024-3-253 (46 pp.)

Employment – Exempt employee
Where an employee alleged that he was improperly classified as exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act, but his actual job activities, education, certifications and hourly rate supported the classification, the company prevailed on this claim. Davenport v. HirePower Personnel Inc., VLW 024-3-236 (28 pp.)

Employment – Failure to pay commissions
Where an employee claimed that he complained to his employer about its alleged failure to pay his commissions, that was not protected conduct under the Fair Labor Standards Act, because it was not a complaint about minimum wage or overtime compensation. Bouchard v. Summit Ridge Energy LLC, VLW 024-3-215 (7 pp.)

Employment – FAWPA
Where a university police officer claims his discharge was related to his report that vehicle dashboard cameras were malfunctioning, he has no claim under the Fraud and Abuse Whistle Blower Protection Act, or FAWPA, because the university is not an employer under FAWPA. Brian Morrison v. George Mason University, et al., VLW 024-8-011 (15 pp.)

Employment – FLSA
Where a man alleged that a staffing company capped payments at 40 hours per week regardless of the actual number of hours worked, that was sufficient to conditionally certify the class under the Fair Labor Standards Act. O’Brien v. Smoothstack Inc., VLW 024-3-188 (26 pp.)

Employment – Paid time off
Where a former employee alleged her employer violated the Virginia Wage Payment Act by failing to “timely compensate” her promised paid-time off, or PTO, the court held that the statute does not apply to PTO. Lundberg v. Delta Response Team LLC, VLW 024-3-230 (23 pp.)

Employment – ‘Past and future impairment to earn money’
Where the Virginia whistleblower statute allows an employee to recover “compensation for lost wages, benefits, and other remuneration,” “remuneration” does not include past and future impairment to earnings. Harris vs. International Gourmet Foods, VLW 024-8-040 (6 pp.)

Employment – Sex discrimination
Where a former Prince William County employee alleged she was passed over for a promotion that was given to a man with inferior qualifications, that other females were not being selected for positions and that postings were rewritten to fit a male applicant over female applicants, she plausibly alleged a claim for sex discrimination. Purcell v. Prince William County, VLW 024-3-249 (9 pp.)

Employment – Title VII
Where former female employees of the Virginia Department of Corrections alleged that faulty body scanners could not distinguish between contraband and female contraceptive/hygiene products and that they were then subjected to highly invasive strip searches, they plausibly alleged claims for disparate treatment and disparate impact under Title VII. Patterson v. Virginia Department of Corrections, VLW 024-3-241 (38 pp.)

Employment – Vaccine refusal
Where former employees of UVA Health alleged that they refused to be vaccinated for COVID-19 because of sincerely held religious beliefs that conflicted with UVA Health’s vaccine mandate, that UVA Health knew of these beliefs and that they were terminated for failing to comply with the mandate despite their beliefs, they plausibly stated a disparate treatment claim. Phillips v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, VLW 024-3-165 (20 pp.)

Employment – Virginia Wage Payment Act
Where two ER physicians plausibly alleged that they were not adequately compensated in violation of the Virginia Wage Payment Act, their complaint survived the staffing company’s motion to dismiss. Naidu-McCown v. Emergency Coverage Corporation, VLW 024-3-176 (15 pp.)

Employment – Whistleblower
Although the circuit court formerly found a former inspector at the Office of the Inspector General, or OSIG, was not terminated for her whistleblowing activities, that decision was not entitled to preclusive effect in this suit against her former supervisor because there was no privity between the parties. Moschetti v. Office of the Inspector General, VLW 024-3-046 (23 pp.)

Employment – Whistleblowing activities
Where a company sued for retaliating against an employee moved to strike allegations that were not included in the employee’s administrative complaint, but the majority of the challenged allegations were specific examples of the general types of misconduct alleged in the agency filing, the motion to strike was largely denied. Lancaster v. Michael Stapleton Associates Ltd., VLW 024-3-258 (13 pp.)

EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

Employment Discrimination – Failure to accommodate
Where an employee for an agency that provides healthcare services to patients in their homes refused to perform direct patient care field visits because of the resulting stress on her knees, and refused the agency’s offer to “spread out” field visits to minimize the stress, the agency prevailed on the failure-to-accommodate claim. Tartaro-McGowan v. Inova Home Health LLC, VLW 024-2-026 (29 pp.)

Employment Discrimination – Medical documentation
Where a government agency requested medical documentation to substantiate an employee’s disability claim, that did not constitute discrimination sufficient to support a claim for disability discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act. Sharpe v. Garland, VLW 024-3-048 (15 pp.)

FAMILY LAW

Family Law – Child custody
A child’s preference to change a custody arrangement, without more, is not a material change in circumstances that would confer jurisdiction on the court to modify the existing custody arrangement. Livingston Jr. v. Stark, VLW 023-8-093 (10 pp.)

INSURANCE

Insurance – Breach of notice provisions
Where a company failed to give timely notice of a potential claim to its carrier, and failed to provide notice of the resulting suit until after judgment was entered, the carrier was relieved of any duty to defend or indemnity. Great American Insurance Company v. RITcon LLC, VLW 023-3-785 (13 pp.)

Insurance – Disability benefits
Where a long-term disability insurer ignored substantial evidence of a man’s disability and its final decision denying the claim was not supported by substantial evidence, it was ordered to pay the man long-term disability benefits. Learn v. The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company, VLW 024-3-151 (61 pp.)

Insurance – Government-ordered COVID closures
Where the district court held that several Virginia executive orders requiring full or partial closure of businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic caused “accidental direct physical loss” to the covered property, it erred. “Direct physical loss” requires “present or impending material destruction or material harm,” which the executive orders did not cause. Elegant Massage LLC v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, VLW 024-2-076 (35 pp.)

Insurance – Long-term benefits
Where a long-term insurer did not explain why it changed its position that an applicant was not disabled, did not follow the court’s instructions on remand and failed to explain why it didn’t consider the opinions of three treating physicians and scholarly sources, its decision denying the man’s application for long-term benefits was vacated. Aisenberg v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company, VLW 024-3-097 (36 pp.)

Insurance – Necessary and indispensable party
Where the administrator for the decedent alleged that the owner of the vehicle that struck him was potentially liable for the fatal injuries, the vehicle owner was a necessary and indispensable party in the coverage dispute. Siefert v. The Travelers Indemnity Company of Connecticut, VLW 023-3-770 (7 pp.)

Insurance – Negligence claim
Where an insurance carrier that paid out more than $558,000 for damages caused by a fire sued a fire suppression inspection company for negligence, but the negligence claim sounded only in contract and did not arise from any independent duty, it was dismissed. Continental Casualty Company v. Pye-Barker Fire & Safety LLC, VLW 024-3-190 (12 pp.)

Insurance – Settlements
Where a global professional firm alleged its insurers wrongfully refused to provide indemnity coverage for settlements totaling $90 million, but the insurers showed the settlements were barred by an exclusion in the policies, they were granted summary judgment. Towers Watson & Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, VLW 024-3-134 (17 pp.)

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Intellectual Property – ‘Fair use
’Where a news website used a photograph of Ted Nugent in an online article without proper attribution or payment to the photographer, and its use was not “fair use,” the district court incorrectly granted summary judgment to the website. Philpot v. Independent Journal Review, VLW 024-2-049 (23 pp.)

Intellectual Property – Lanham Act protection
Where the manufacturer of Timberland boots argued that certain features were protected under the Lanham Act, but the features had not acquired a distinctive meaning, the application was denied. TBL Licensing LLC v. Vidal, VLW 024-2-108 (33 pp.)

JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction – Maryland attorney
Where a Maryland attorney was sued over her representation of a minor in juvenile court proceedings in Maryland, the Virginia federal district court lacked personal jurisdiction over the attorney, who did not purposely avail herself of the privilege of conducting activities in Virginia. Blair v. Appomattox County School Board, VLW 024-3-256 (10 pp.)

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE

Medical Malpractice – ‘Empty chair’ instruction
Where the decedent died from a ruptured aortic aneurysm, the trial court correctly instructed the jury on the issue of causation, and correctly refused to give appellant estate administrator’s proposed “empty chair” instruction. Burch v. Sensenig, et al., VLW 024-7-093 (10 pp.)

Medical Malpractice – Expert opinion admissibility
Plaintiff’s expert meets the statutory qualifications and thus may testify on the standard of care in a case where plaintiff’s decedent suffered a “massive spiral break to her right humerus bone” while defendant doctor was performing a procedure on her shoulder. A defense expert will be excluded because his testimony would be based on “multiple layers of speculation.” Widlacki v. Kosteli, et al., VLW 024-8-021 (4 pp.)

Medical Malpractice – FTCA discretionary function exception
Where the government argued that a prison doctor’s decisions whether to refer an inmate to a specialist and whether to advise him of his lab results were protected by the discretionary function exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act, or FTCA, this argument was rejected. Medical/professional discretion is not the type of discretion the statutory exception refers to. Hancock v. United States, VLW 023-3-786 (9 pp.)

MUNICIPAL

Municipal – Equal Protection claim
Where real estate developers alleged that the Chesapeake City Council denied their rezoning application for unlawful reasons, but they failed to plead any facts showing they were treated differently than similarly situated comparators or that the denial was because of discriminatory animus, their complaint was dismissed. SAS Associates 1 LLC v. City Council of the City of Chesapeake Virginia, VLW 024-2-037 (13 pp.)

Municipal – Sheriff’s department costs
Where the circuit court ordered the City of Emporia to pay its proportionate share of the costs and expenses of the County of Greensville sheriff’s budget for fiscal year 2021-22, it erred. The city was only responsible for those costs and expenses relating to the circuit court and the jointly used buildings, not the entire budget. City of Emporia v. County of Greensville, VLW 024-7-170 (12 pp.)

NEGLIGENCE

Negligence – Capacity to sue
Where a special conservator appointed to represent a man injured in an automobile accident did not register the Massachusetts conservatorship in Virginia before filing the amended complaint, he lacked capacity to maintain an action in Virginia as conservator. Because the foreign conservatorship has now been domesticated, he can file an amended complaint. Milne v. Move Freight Trucking LLC, VLW 024-3-015 (12 pp.)

Negligence – Lack of notice
Where the owner and facilities manager at an office building where the plaintiff was injured had no prior actual or constructive knowledge of the allegedly hazardous condition, they were granted summary judgment. Whittier v. Knight Facilities Management Inc., VLW 024-3-238 (7 pp.)

Negligence – Malfunctioning elevator
Where hotel guests who alleged they were injured when an elevator malfunctioned sued the company responsible for maintaining the elevator, but the operator owed them no duty, it was dismissed from the suit. Manning v. Drury Hotels Company LLC, VLW 024-3-240 (16 pp.)

Negligence – Prior settlement
Where the manufacturer of allegedly defective flooring previously reached a settlement that resolved various consumer protection claims, that agreement didn’t bar this wrongful death suit. The scope of the class claims and the facts underlying the class complaints conclusively show that the settlement agreement did not settle claims premised on bodily injury or wrongful death. Kappel v. LL Flooring Inc., VLW 024-2-027 (21 pp.)

Negligence – Speeding state trooper
Where a woman sued a Virginia state trooper after she was involved in an automobile accident while the officer was driving 117 mph, the trooper’s motions to dismiss and claims of immunity were denied. Ziegler v. Dunn, VLW 024-3-103 (18 pp.)

Negligence – TASER training injury
Where a man injured while training to become a TASER instructor sued the master instructor for negligence, and there were disputed issues of material fact over whether the man assumed the risk or was contributorily negligent, the instructor’s motion for summary judgment was denied. Curran v. Axon Enterprise Inc., VLW 024-3-045 (30 pp.)

Negligence – ‘Wet floor’ sign
Where a man alleged that he was injured when he tripped and fell over a “wet floor” sign, but the parties disputed whether the hotel was negligent in leaving the sign in a darkened area, whether it should have known the sign was a danger and whether the man should have been aware of the sign, a jury will decide these issues. DeCandia v. Remington Lodging & Hospitality LLC, VLW 024-3-221 (11 pp.)

Negligence – Wrongful death
Where a complaint failed to plead facts supporting a negligence claim arising out of a woman’s wrongful death, and the woman’s estate failed to identify additional facts that would allow a plausible claim to be pleaded, the claim was dismissed with prejudice. Hornsby v. United States of America, VLW 023-3-788 (14 pp.)

PARENT AND CHILD

Parent and Child – Close relative adoption
Where the close relative adoption statute states that the adoption proceeding shall commence in the circuit court when the child has continuously resided with the petitioner for two or more years, it did not require “continuous physical custody” throughout the pendency of the adoption petition. As such, the circuit court erred in dismissing the grandparents’ petition because they lost custody during the pendency of the petition. Vega v. Vega, VLW 024-7-153 (7 pp.)(unpublished opinion)

PERSONAL INJURY

Personal Injury – Grossly negligent supervision
Where appellant sued a sheriff and a sheriff’s deputy for grossly negligent supervision while in their custody, the circuit court incorrectly granted appellees summary judgment. Howard v. Harris, et al., VLW 024-7-071 (31 pp.)

PRODUCTS LIABILITY

Products Liability – Fraud
Where the owner of a boat alleged an engine manufacturer fraudulently induced the owner into installing refurbished engines and upgraded equipment, but the owner failed to show the manufacturer’s allegedly fraudulent statements were factual, were knowing and intentionally false or were made with fraudulent intent, the manufacturer prevailed on the fraud claims. What Hurts LLC v. Volvo Penta of the Americas LLC, VLW 024-3-018 (48 pp.)

REAL ESTATE

Real Estate – Adverse possession
Where appellant claimed a portion of the subject property by adverse possession, the statute of limitations for adverse possession was not reset when appellee purchased the property. Ho v. Rahman, VLW 024-7-040 (15 pp.)

Real Estate – Easement
The trial court correctly determined that appellees established a prescriptive easement over a right of way on appellant’s land. The court also correctly ordered appellant to remove a gate across the right of way. Boxley v. Crouse, et al., VLW 023-7-483 (7 pp.)

Real Estate – Rezoning
Where the Brunswick County Board of Supervisors approved an upzoning of agricultural land to business use, the circuit court correctly granted the developers summary judgment against appellants’ claims that the board’s decision “was unreasonable as a matter of law.” Hartley, et al. v. Board of Supervisors of Brunswick County, VLW 024-7-048 (20 pp.)

Real Estate – Zoning variance
Where a board of zoning appeals, or BZA, denied appellee a variance for an existing deck and staircase that encroached on a five-foot setback for lakefront property, this unreasonably restricted appellee’s use of its property. The circuit court correctly reversed the BZA. The Board of Supervisors for the County of Louisa, Virginia v. Vallerie Holdings of Virginia, LLC, VLW 024-7-065 (19 pp.)

REAL PROPERTY

Real Property – Confessed judgment
Although the holder of a confessed judgment moved to enforce a lien in 2008, the property was not sold until 2021, because the owners challenged the enforceability of the confessed judgment, filed for bankruptcy after the court ordered the property to be sold at public auction, sued the creditor in bankruptcy court and moved for reconsideration of an order entered years ago. Their challenges to the ultimate sale were also rejected. Agnew v. United Leasing Corporation, VLW 024-7-136 (19 pp.)

Real Property – Partition
Where a complaint for partition did not place the opposing parties on notice that the co-tenant wanted compensation for expenses it incurred, and the co-tenant did not move for compensation within the time for responsive pleadings or any other point before the circuit court ruled on the partition, the circuit court erred in requiring the opposing parties to pay expenses incurred by their co-tenant. Lehmann v. WFV Holdings LLC, VLW 024-7-146 (14 pp.)

Real Property – Restrictions
Where a subdivision’s Deed of Trust imposed broad restrictions on the manner in which most lots could be used, but exempted one lot from the general restrictions, the court rejected an attempt by other owners to impose new restrictions on the exempted lot. Westrick v. Dorcon Group LLC, VLW 024-6-022 (6 pp.)

Real Property – Technical noncompliance
Where a man argued a quitclaim Where a man argued a quitclaim deed was invalid because it was not prepared by a lawyer, as required by Virginia Code § 17.1-223(B), but the purpose of the statute is that a recorded deed put a purchaser on notice, not whether the deed complies with technicalities, his argument was rejected. Bowman v. Samuel, VLW 024-8-041 (3 pp.)

SANCTIONS

Sanctions – Attorneys’ fees
Where the district court concluded a woman’s Fair Housing Act claims were without foundation merely because she did not prevail at summary judgment, and awarded fees based upon that conclusion, it erred. While she may not have ultimately adduced evidence sufficient to survive summary judgment, the district court was not entitled to award attorney’s fees on that basis. Abdelhalim v. Lewis, VLW 024-2-012 (23 pp.)

Sanctions – Receivership
Where three corporate defendants repeatedly failed to respond to post-judgment discovery regarding its financial operations, even after the appointment of a special master, they were placed in receivership under a qualified forensic accountant. RLI Insurance Company v. Nexus Services Inc., VLW 024-3-279 (16 pp.)

Sanctions – Subpoenas
Where a plaintiff moved to compel a non-party to respond to subpoenas, and the non-party then filed a motion for sanctions, arguing that the motion to compel was filed in an effort to circumvent a ruling on the motions to quash filed by the defendants, but the record showed the plaintiff acted in good faith, the sanctions motion was denied. Hartnett v. Hardenbergh, VLW 024-3-047 (8 pp.)

TAXATION

Taxation – Church-owned property
Where a church rented property to a commercial tenant, the property is not exempt from property taxes. The church-owned property was not used or occupied exclusively for religious worship. Emmanuel Worship Center, et al. v. The City of Petersburg, VLW 024-7-049 (16 pp.)

TORT

Tort – Defamation
Where the employee of a competitor emailed a customer that the plaintiff, a provider of electronic pull tabs for the regulated charitable gaming market, was “under a very serious State Investigation in Virginia!!!!!” resulting in that customer cancelling a contract with the plaintiff, the defamation and tortious interference claims survived the employee’s motion to dismiss. Grover Gaming Inc. v. Huffman, VLW 023-3-799 (17 pp.)

Tort – Defamation
Where a former school superintendent alleged a news story falsely reported that he was “ousted,” when he was neither forced to resign nor required to sign a separation agreement, his defamation claim survived the station’s motion to dismiss. The term “ousted” when used in this context, was defamatory, was not an opinion and there were sufficient allegations of actual malice. Sroufe v. Scripps Media Inc., VLW 024-3-218 (13 pp.)

Tort – Deliberate indifference
Where a doctor knowingly or recklessly disregarded an inmate’s need for psychiatric medication and treatment, and the inmate subsequently committed suicide, the deliberate indifference and wrongful death claims survived the doctor’s motion for summary judgment. Lapp v. United States of America, VLW 023-3-777 (21 pp.)

Tort – Federal enclave doctrine
Where military servicemembers and their spouses who reside or resided at Fort Belvoir filed suit over “reprehensible housing conditions” on the base, the claims under the Virginia Consumer Protection Act and Virginia Residential Landlord and Tenant Act were barred by the federal enclave doctrine. Fischer v. Fort Belvoir Residential Communities LLC, VLW 024-3-082 (11 pp.)

Tort – Investigation
Where a former commonwealth employee sued an outside law firm that investigated her conduct, but her defamation, due process and conspiracy claims all failed as a matter of law, the suit was dismissed with prejudice. Moschetti v. Nixon Peabody LLP, VLW 024-3-293 (32 pp.)

Tort – Title IX
Where a former student at the University of Virginia alleged that the university breached its duties under Title IX to investigate her complaints of sexual abuse by a professor, most of her claims survived the university’s motion to dismiss. Doe v. The University of Virginia, VLW 024-3-198 (13 pp.)

Tort – TSA screening
Where a woman alleged a Transportation Security Administration officer intentionally conducting an invasive screening, despite the woman’s age and disability, resulting in the woman cancelling or declining many trips that require commercial air travel, her intentional infliction of emotional distress claim survived the government’s motion to dismiss. Feld v. United States of America, VLW 024-3-062 (4 pp.)

Tort – Uber passenger assault
Where a passenger alleged an Uber driver assaulted him following a dispute over payment, a reasonable jury could determine that the assault was in furtherance of Uber’s business. Based on the facts alleged in the complaint, the driver was at the address as part of his business driving for Uber and assaulted the man to coerce payment of a debt owed to Uber; therefore the vicarious liability claim survived Uber’s motion to dismiss. Fuentes v. Uber Technologies Inc., VLW 024-3-124 (10 pp.)

Tort – Vicarious liability
Where a registered nurse committed a sexual battery upon a patient, but the acts of sexual molestation did not coincide with his performance of any job-related services and resulted instead from a wholly personal motive, the hospital was not vicariously liable. H.C. v. Potomac Hospital Corporation of Prince William, VLW 024-7-151 (20 pp.)

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

Workers’ Compensation – Compensable injury
Where claimant, an airline employee, slipped while on a walkway that led from an employee parking area to near the entrance of her employer’s terminal, the Virginia Workers’ Compensation Commission correctly ruled that claimant’s injuries arose in the course of her employment. This case is not governed by the going and coming rule. Rather, the extended premises doctrine applies. United Continental Holdings v. Sullivan, VLW 024-7-021 (12 pp.)

Workers’ Compensation – Disability claim
The Virginia Workers’ Compensation Commission incorrectly concluded that a claim for temporary total disability was untimely where the claim was filed within two years of the last date the claimant’s employer voluntarily paid full wages for light-duty work. Under the relevant statute, such payments are “‘compensation paid pursuant to an award of compensation[.]’” Walker v. Dep’t of Corrections, VLW 024-7-010 (10 pp.)