Tag Archives: Judge Randolph A. Beales

One-year limit for pharmacy’s reimbursement claim (access required)

Under the workers’ compensation act, appellant pharmacy is a health care provider and is bound by a one-year limitations period in which to seek reimbursement for prescriptions dispensed to a workers’ compensation claimant. Overview Dove injured her shoulder in a ...

Read More »

Separations, reconciliations did not nullify postnup agreement (access required)

The parties’ postnuptial agreement was not abrogated by their separations and reconciliations. The circuit court erred by relying on Code § 20-155 to conclude otherwise because the postnuptial agreement was neither a separation agreement nor a property settlement agreement. Overview ...

Read More »

Hearsay properly admitted at suppression hearing (access required)

A police investigator was correctly allowed to provide hearsay testimony at a suppression hearing about information obtained from a confidential informant. The information was reliable. Further, any issue of reliability would go to the weight, rather than the admissibility, of ...

Read More »

Award agreement did not preserve shoulder claim (access required)

Claimant’s award agreement with his employer for work-related injuries did not preserve his claim of a shoulder injury. The Virginia Workers’ Compensation Commission correctly ruled that he failed to reassert the claim within the statute of limitations. Background Lazo, the ...

Read More »

Record supports divorce on adultery grounds (access required)

The record supports the trial court’s granting a divorce based on father’s adultery. The court’s custody award and the equitable distribution of marital property are likewise affirmed. However, the court’s awards of spousal support and child support are reversed. The ...

Read More »

Counsel had implicit authority to stipulate property value (access required)

In this divorce action, the trial court correctly ruled it could receive counsels’ stipulations as to property value but erred in part regarding determinations that certain real estate was husband’s separate property. The court also erred it classifying husband’s purchase ...

Read More »