DOCSLIB.ORG

District Court Judges' Benchbook Section Ii(C) – Appendix

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
District Court Judges' Benchbook Section Ii(C) – Appendix District Court Judges’ Benchbook 2012 EDITION PREPARED BY THE ASSOCIATION OF DISTRICT COURT JUDGES OF VIRGINIA with the assistance of The Office of the Executive Secretary Supreme Court of Virginia Richmond, Virginia ASSOCIATION OF DISTRICT COURT JUDGES OF VIRGINIA BENCHBOOK COMMITTEE 2012 EDITION The Honorable William A. Becker, Chair The Honorable Randall M. Blow The Honorable Becky J. Moore The Honorable Robert S. Brewbaker, Jr. The Honorable Stacey W. Moreau The Honorable Pamela L. Brooks The Honorable Deborah M. Paxson* The Honorable Francis W. Burkart, III The Honorable Florence A. Powell The Honorable David Eugene Cheek, Sr. The Honorable Robert A. Pustilnik The Honorable Jay Edward Dugger The Honorable Angela E. Roberts The Honorable Constance Frogale The Honorable William W. Sharp The Honorable Teena D. Grodner The Honorable Frank W. Somerville* The Honorable Karen A. Henenberg The Honorable Robert C. Viar, Jr. The Honorable Julian W. Johnson The Honorable Jacqueline F. Ward Talevi The Honorable Colleen K. Killilea* The Honorable A. Ellen White* The Honorable Judith Anne Kline The Honorable Susan L. Whitlock The Honorable R. Larry Lewis The Honorable Alotha C. Willis The Honorable Vincent A. Lilley* The Honorable Dean S. Worcester The Honorable Barry G. Logsdon * Subcommittee Chair DISTRICT COURT JUDGES’ BENCHBOOK TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DISTRICT COURTS – IN GENERAL . 1. Organization of District Court System ................................................................................................. 1 2. Voluntary Associations of District Court Judges ................................................................................ 2 3. Organization of Judicial Districts ......................................................................................................... 3 4. Judicial Conduct..................................................................................................................................... 4 5. General Management ............................................................................................................................. 6 6. Research Resources for Judges ............................................................................................................. 8 7. Marriages ................................................................................................................................................ 9 II. GENERAL DISTRICT COURT A. Contempt 1. Forms of Contempt: Criminal and Civil ............................................................................................ 11 a. Distinguishing Civil and Criminal Contempt .................................................................................. 11 b. Civil Contempt ................................................................................................................................ 12 c. Criminal Contempt .......................................................................................................................... 16 d. Statutory Violations ........................................................................................................................ 24 e. Appeal of Findings of Contempt ..................................................................................................... 29 B. Civil Procedure 1. Civil Jurisdiction .................................................................................................................................. 32 a. Dollar Amount ................................................................................................................................ 32 b. Interest ............................................................................................................................................ 32 c. Subject Matter ................................................................................................................................. 32 d. Venue .............................................................................................................................................. 34 2. Small Claims Division .......................................................................................................................... 35 a. Jurisdiction ...................................................................................................................................... 35 b. Subject Matters ............................................................................................................................... 35 c. How Actions are Commenced (Special Forms Provided to Clerk) ................................................. 35 d. Special Unauthorized Practice of Law Rules .................................................................................. 35 e. Removal .......................................................................................................................................... 36 f. Rules of Evidence Suspended ......................................................................................................... 36 g. Object of Small Claims Division .................................................................................................... 36 h. Judgment and Collection ................................................................................................................. 36 i. Appeals (§ 16.1-122.7) .................................................................................................................... 36 3. Process ................................................................................................................................................... 37 a. Types ............................................................................................................................................... 37 b. Return Date ..................................................................................................................................... 37 c. Service of Process ........................................................................................................................... 37 d. Trial Date Information .................................................................................................................... 39 e. Actions Brought By and Against Persons Under a Disability (PUD) ............................................. 39 f. Amendments to Pleadings, Rule 7A:9 ............................................................................................ 40 g. Counsel of Record ........................................................................................................................... 40 h. Unauthorized Practice of Law ......................................................................................................... 40 4. Pre-Trial Matters ................................................................................................................................. 41 a. Removal, § 16.1-92 ......................................................................................................................... 41 b. Venue, § 8.01-257 et seq. ................................................................................................................ 41 c. Bills of Particulars and Grounds of Defense ................................................................................... 43 d. Discovery ........................................................................................................................................ 44 e. Affidavits in Contract Claims, §§ 16.1-88, 8.01-28 ........................................................................ 44 ASSOCIATION OF DISTRICT COURT JUDGES OF VIRGINIA 2012 EDITION BENCHBOOK COMMITTEE - i - DISTRICT COURT JUDGES’ BENCHBOOK TABLE OF CONTENTS f. Statutes of Limitation, § 8.01-228 et seq. ....................................................................................... 44 g. Counterclaims and Cross-Claims §§ 16.1-88.01, -88.02................................................................. 46 h. Amendments to Pleadings ............................................................................................................... 46 5. Trial ....................................................................................................................................................... 47 a. Guidelines ....................................................................................................................................... 47 b. Exclusion of Witnesses ................................................................................................................... 47 c. Evidence Statutes ............................................................................................................................ 47 d. Appearance and Non-Appearance by Parties .................................................................................. 51 e. Continuances ................................................................................................................................... 52 6. Appeals .................................................................................................................................................. 53 7. New Trials ............................................................................................................................................. 55 8. Enforcement of Judgments .................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Religious Development of the Early German Settlers in "Greater Pennsylvania": the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia*
    The Religious Development of the Early German Settlers In "Greater Pennsylvania": The Shenandoah Valley of Virginia* John B. Frantz The Pennsylvania State University Introduction Throughout much of the eighteenth century, the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia was the frontier. The first Europeans to settle there came from colonies to the north. They had the opportunity to create new culture in this sparsely inhabited area. Most of the Indians had aban- doned it, and Europeans from the Tidewater had not yet spread their plantations that far west. The Valley was an ideal location for innova- tion. Nevertheless, the early settlers brought with them their religious heritage and developed patterns and institutions for their spiritual nur- ture that were remarkably similar to those that they had known in their previous homes. Historiography Study of the religious development of the early German settlers has been underway for more than a century and a half One of the first accounts appeared in Samuel Kercheval's 1833 History of the Valley of Virginia.' A more detailed description is contained in John W Way- 1. Samuel Kercheval, The History of the Valley of Virginia 4th ed. (Strasburg Shenandoah Publish- ing House, 1925), originally published in 1833. The Religious Development of the Early German Settlers 67 land's History ofThe German Element of the Shenandoah Valley, published in 1907,2 some of which he included in his History of Shenandoah County that appeared twenty years later.3 Dedicated to Wayland and drawing on his work but going further is The Pennsylvania Germans of the Shenandoah Valley, the 1962 volume of the Pennsylvania German Folklore Society, by Elmer Lewis Smith, John G.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia Natural Resources and the New Virginia Wetlands Act Denis J
    Washington and Lee Law Review Volume 30 | Issue 1 Article 3 Spring 3-1-1973 Virginia Natural Resources and the New Virginia Wetlands Act Denis J. Brion Washington and Lee University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr Part of the Natural Resources Law Commons Recommended Citation Denis J. Brion, Virginia Natural Resources and the New Virginia Wetlands Act, 30 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 19 (1973), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol30/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington and Lee Law Review at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Law Review by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VIRGINIA NATURAL RESOURCES LAW AND THE NEW VIRGINIA WETLANDS ACT DENIS J. BRION* When the Virginia General Assembly enacted a wetlands protection statute at its 1972 Session,' Virginia became one of the last East Coast states to enact laws protecting its valuable wetlands resources. However, unlike its sister states,2 Virginia has chosen to place the primary authority and initiative for wetlands protection not in a state-level agency created for the purpose, but in its localities: cities, counties and towns. The Virginia Wetlands Act enables each Virginia locality containing defined wetlands to set up a local wetlands zoning board whose duty is to pass on all uses, with limited exceptions; of local wetlands.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia Lawyervol
    Virginia LawyerVOL. 70/NO. 1 • June 2021 VIRGINIA LAWYER REGISTER The Official Publication of the Virginia State Bar The TRuSTS & Estates ISSue Featuring: Virginia Creditor Protections The Corporate Transparency Act An Epidemic of Elder Abuse Cryptocurrency and Estate Planning Meet Vera. The ALPS Virtual Ethics Risk Assessment, more aectionately known as Vera, was created to serve as your guide to quickly and eectively help you understand where you fall in terms of risk management within your firm. Take 20 minutes to get your free risk assessment today. alpsinsurance.com/vera Virginia Lawyer The Official Publication of the Virginia State Bar June 2021 Volume 70/Number 1 Features Noteworthy TRUSTS & ESTATES ISSUE VSB NEWS 13 The Trusts and Estates Issue 31 VLRS Increases Revenues for Lawyers While Helping Virginians 14 The Corporate Transparency Act: 32 Highlights of the April 21 VSB What Practitioners Need to Know Council Meeting by Brooke C. Tansill 32 Winners Announced in Bar Council Elections 17 Crypto is Coming to an Estate Plan Near You: How to Be Ready 33 In Memoriam by Alexander W. Mejias and 34 VSB Conferences and Seminars Jennifer Lee Schooley Carrying on Virtually 20 Creditor Protection for Parties to a 35 Dues Statements Mailed: Trust in Virginia Deadlines Back to Normal by Stephen M. Watson Departments 22 An Epidemic of Elder Abuse: June 15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day 6 Forum by Sheryl Herndon 6 Jest is for All 50 Professional Notices 52 Classified Ads WELLNESS 53 Advertiser’s Index 27 Mental Health Courts During the COVID-19 Pandemic by the Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Charting Your Course
    Charting Your Course A Property Owners Guide to Increasing Rental Property Value and Enhancing Property Management Charting Your Course Charting Your Course A Property Owners Guide to Increasing Rental Property Value and Enhancing Property Management August 2012 City of Norfolk Virginia Department of Communication Bureau of Community Enrichment Room 500 City Hall Building / 810 Union Street Norfolk VA, 23510 757-664-6770 http://www.norfolk.gov/communityenrichment/ Page 3 Charting Your Course Charting Your Course TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 8 FOREWORD 10 KNOW THE VIRGINIA RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD & TENANT ACT 11 COSTS AND BENEFITS 11 COSTS OF DRUG ACTIVITY IN RENTALS 11 BENEFITS OF ACTIVE MANAGEMENT 12 CHAPTER 1: PREPARING THE PROPERTY 13 THE BASICS 13 KEEP THE PROPERTY UP TO HABITABILITY STANDARDS 13 CPTED DEFINED 13 KEEP THE PROPERTY VISIBLE AND CONTROL ACCESS 17 KEEP THE PROPERTY WELL-MAINTAINED 18 CHAPTER 2: APPLICANT SCREENING 19 THE BASICS 19 APPLICANT SCREENING, CIVIL RIGHTS AND FAIR HOUSING 20 WRITTEN TENANT CRITERIA: WHAT TO POST 21 Introduction 21 Screening Criteria 22 Rental Agreement 25 Other Forms and Procedures 25 REGARDING BORDERLINE APPLICANTS 25 APPLICATION INFORMATION: WHAT TO INCLUDE 26 ABOUT FEES AND APPLICATION DEPOSITS 27 HOW TO VERIFY INFORMATION 27 A NOTE ABOUT HIRING EMPLOYEES 30 HOW TO TURN DOWN AN APPLICANT 30 OTHER SCREENING TIPS AND WARNING SIGNS 32 CHAPTER 3: RENTAL AGREEMENTS 35 THE BASICS 35 USE A CURRENT RENTAL AGREEMENT 35 Month-to-month or Long-term lease 35 Page 4 Charting Your Course ELEMENTS TO EMPHASIZE
    [Show full text]
  • “White”: the Judicial Abolition of Native Slavery in Revolutionary Virginia and Its Racial Legacy
    ABLAVSKY REVISED FINAL.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 4/13/2011 1:24 PM COMMENT MAKING INDIANS “WHITE”: THE JUDICIAL ABOLITION OF NATIVE SLAVERY IN REVOLUTIONARY VIRGINIA AND ITS RACIAL LEGACY † GREGORY ABLAVSKY INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1458 I. THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF INDIAN SLAVERY IN VIRGINIA .............. 1463 A. The Origins of Indian Slavery in Early America .................. 1463 B. The Legal History of Indian Slavery in Virginia .................. 1467 C. Indians, Africans, and Colonial Conceptions of Race ........... 1473 II. ROBIN V. HARDAWAY, ITS PROGENY, AND THE LEGAL RECONCEPTUALIZATION OF SLAVERY ........................................... 1476 A. Indian Freedom Suits and Racial Determination ...................................................... 1476 B. Robin v. Hardaway: The Beginning of the End ................. 1480 1. The Statutory Claims ............................................ 1481 2. The Natural Law Claims ....................................... 1484 3. The Outcome and the Puzzle ............................... 1486 C. Robin’s Progeny ............................................................. 1487 † J.D. Candidate, 2011; Ph.D. Candidate, 2014, in American Legal History, Univer- sity of Pennsylvania. I would like to thank Sarah Gordon, Daniel Richter, Catherine Struve, and Michelle Banker for their insightful comments on earlier drafts of this Comment; Richard Ross, Michael Zuckerman, and Kathy Brown for discussions on the work’s broad contours; and
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia and Control of Fishing Rights
    William & Mary Law Review Volume 1 (1957-1958) Issue 2 Article 3 April 1958 Virginia and Control of Fishing Rights James A. Leftwich Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr Part of the Water Law Commons Repository Citation James A. Leftwich, Virginia and Control of Fishing Rights, 1 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 287 (1958), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol1/iss2/3 Copyright c 1958 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr VIRGINIA AND THE CONTROL OF FISHING RIGHTS JAMEs A. LErwicu The power of the state to regulate fishing in her public waters has become an accepted doctrine in this country.' The doctrine purportedly emerged from the English common law which vested the ownership of ferae naturae2 in the .sovereign. While there is some dispute among the authorities whether-the ownership theory became the common law of England in fact or by error in Blackstone's interpretation of the common law,3 it was undoubtedly incorporated into the law of the United States in 1896 by the case of Geer v. Connecticut.4 The regulatory powers so extended to the several states were exercised as early as 1780 in Virginia. By act of that year the shores of all streams in eastern Virginia, not then granted, were reserved as fishing commons.5 In 1785 Virginia entered into a treaty with Maryland for the regulation of fish and oysters in the Potomac River." In upholding the validity of a tax required by Act of As- sembly approved March 3, 1898,7 Judge Buchanan stated in Morgan's Case at page 814: "Neither is a license tax upon the residents of the State, for the privilege of fishing in the waters belonging to the State in violation of any pro.Vision of the Con- 1McCready v.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Legal Education in Virginia, 14 U
    University of Richmond Law Review Volume 14 | Issue 1 Article 9 1979 The iH story of Legal Education in Virginia W. Hamilton Bryson University of Richmond Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/lawreview Part of the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation W. H. Bryson, The History of Legal Education in Virginia, 14 U. Rich. L. Rev. 155 (1979). Available at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/lawreview/vol14/iss1/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Richmond Law Review by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE HISTORY OF LEGAL EDUCATION IN VIRGINIA W. Hamilton Bryson* I. BEFORE 1779 The English Inns of Court in London had ceased to perform their educational functions in the middle of the seventeenth century.' For the next hundred years or so, there was no formal or organized instruction of the English common law. Lawyers, both barristers and solicitors in England and in America, learned their profession as best they could in unstructured situations. They learned by serv- ing as apprentices or clerks to practicing lawyers, by the indepen- dent reading of law books, and by observation in the courtroom itself.2 Although the four Inns of Court in the eighteenth century no longer gave an education, they did give the professional degree of barrister. A barrister was deemed to be of the social degree of an esquire. The Inns of Court thrived in the eighteenth century because they controlled the admission of barristers to the practice of law, pretended to supervise the general conduct of the bar, and provided office space and a social club for their members.
    [Show full text]
  • Note and Comment
    Michigan Law Review Volume 18 Issue 5 1920 Note and Comment Joseph H. Drake University of Michigan Law School Grover C. Grismore University of Michigan Law School Victor H. Lane University of Michigan Law School Edgar N. Durfee University of Michigan Law School Robert G. Day University of Michigan Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr Part of the Courts Commons Recommended Citation Joseph H. Drake, Grover C. Grismore, Victor H. Lane, Edgar N. Durfee & Robert G. Day, Note and Comment, 18 MICH. L. REV. 405 (1920). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol18/iss5/5 This Response or Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Law Review at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MICHIGAN LAW REVIEW THZ PUBLISHED MONTHLY DURING THE ACADEMIC YEAR, EXCLUSIVZ OF OCTOBER, BY LAW SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHICAN GUUCRIPTION PRICE $2.50 PER YEAR. 36 CENTs PER NUMBER RALPH V. AIGLER, EIrfOR-IN-CHIEF ASSOCIATE EDITORS HENRY M. BATES "]EDsoN R. SUNDERLAND E. C. GODDARD JOSEPH H. DRAxE JOHN B. WAIER STUDENTS, APPOINTED BY THE FACULTY ALAN V. BOYD, of Indiana BEN B. MfATTHEWS, of Arkansas MORSE D. CAMPBELL, of Michigan FRANK C. PATTERSON, of Michigan ROLLA L. CARPENTER, of Michigan LISLE L. POLLCCK, of Michigan ROBERT G. DAY, of Ohio JESSE M. SEABRIGHT, of Ohio HENRY I.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Survey of Virginia Law: Administrative Procedure John Paul Jones University of Richmond, [email protected]
    University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Law Faculty Publications School of Law 1999 Annual Survey of Virginia Law: Administrative Procedure John Paul Jones University of Richmond, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/law-faculty-publications Part of the Administrative Law Commons Recommended Citation Charles Bonner, et. al., Annual Survey of Virginia Law: Administrative Procedure, 33 U. Rich. L. Rev. 727 (1999) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE Charles Bonner * John Paul Jones Henry M. Kohnlein Since the last report on developments in Virginia's law of administrative procedure,' both her General Assembly and her courts have been busy making new law. This year's General Assembly revamped the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), and made adjustments to laws regulating the periods in which agencies must decide certain types of licensing cases and promulgate certain procedural regulations. Meanwhile, the courts ofthe Commonwealth were active in the field, addressing open questions concerning the following subjects: rulemaking, due process, evidence, timeliness, and judicial review. I. LEGISLATIVE CHANGES TO VIRGINIA'S FOIA Among the developments in Virginia administrative law wrought legislatively in 1999, the most noticed was a revision of FOIA. Much fanfare accompanied the revisions through the General Assembly, where it passed both houses unanimously. The Governor added his approval in the same cooperative spirit, negotiating only minor changes affecting his estate.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia Lawyer June/July 2012
    Virginia LawyerVOL. 61/NO. 1 • JUNE/JULY 2012 The Official Publication of the Virginia State Bar 2012–13 VSB President W. David Harless feature articles by the Intellectual Property Section Highlights of the June Council Meeting and the 74th Annual Meeting www.vsb.org Mark your calendar! TRUST TROUBLE & TIDBITSmove insideS 4/c An ALPS Ethics and Professionalism Program (WKLFV&/(&UHGLW+RXUV,QSDUWQHUVKLSZLWKWKH9LUJLQLD6WDWH%DU CITY / SESSION DATE LOCATION Chesapeake AM Sept. 10 Chesapeake Convention Center Richmond AM Sept. 11 Richmond Covention Center Charlottesville AM Sept. 12 Charlottesville Double Tree Manassas AM Sept. 13 Manassas Verizon Center Salem AM Oct. 1 Salem Civic Center NOVA AM Oct. 3 The Waterford NOVA PM Oct. 3 The Waterford AM Session Times: PM Session Times: 8:30 am Check-In 1:00 pm Check-In 9:00-12:15 pm Program 1:30-4:45 pm Program ,i}ÃÌÀ>ÌÊ"«iÃÊÕÞÊ£ÊUÊÜÜÜ°>«ÃiÌ°VÉÛ>Vi Virginia Lawyer The Official Publication of the Virginia State Bar June/July 2012 Volume 61/ Number 1 Features INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SECTION 17 Intellectual Property Section Serves Members and Encourages Interest in Intellectual Property Law by Stephen W. Palan 18 First-To-File or First-To-Invent: What’s the Difference? The U.S. Patent System Transitions by Matthew R. Osenga 20 IP Owners in Foreign Proceedings May Force the Disclosure of Information Inside the United States by Christopher P. Foley 24 Trademark Board Finds CRACKBERRY Infringing and Not a Parody of BLACKBERRY by Timothy J. Lockhart 28 Recent Developments Regarding Business Method Patents by Suzanne C. Walts and William J.
    [Show full text]
  • PRESENT: All the Justices CYGNUS NEWPORT-PHASE 1B, LLC, ET AL
    PRESENT: All the Justices CYGNUS NEWPORT-PHASE 1B, LLC, ET AL. OPINION BY v. Record No. 151702 JUSTICE STEPHEN R. McCULLOUGH September 22, 2016 CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, ET AL. FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH William S. Moore, Jr., Judge We consider two issues in this appeal. First, we examine whether a special assessment lien has priority over a deed of trust that was recorded before the special assessments were imposed, or whether the special assessment lien is instead extinguished by the foreclosure of the deed of trust. Second, we must determine whether the new owners of property subject to a special assessment lien may have such a lien declared void years after the lien has been agreed to by the prior owner and after bonds have been issued in reliance on those assessments. We conclude that a special assessment lien has priority over a deed of trust that was recorded before the special assessments, and that the belated challenge to the assessments cannot succeed. BACKGROUND The prior owner of the property, Portsmouth Venture One, LLC, acquired title on July 22, 2004, to a 176 acre parcel located in Portsmouth, Virginia known as tax parcel number 5240010. On that same date, the prior owner granted a deed of trust on the property to Bank of America to secure two notes. The deed and the deed of trust were recorded on August 11, 2004. The prior owner petitioned the City of Portsmouth for the formation of a community development authority, or CDA. In 2005, the City acquiesced and enacted an ordinance creating the New Port Community Development Authority.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia Lawyer December 2013
    Virginia LaVOLw. 62/NO. y5 • DeECEMrBER 2013 The Official Publication of the Virginia State Bar Special section inside on the Virginia Law Foundation: Forty years of philanthropy, justice, education, and the rule of law. feature articles by the Virginia Association of Law Libraries www.vsb.org Appeals When it comes time to appeal or to resist an appeal, call Steve Emmert at (757) 965-5021. L. STEVEN EMMERT Rated AV www.virginia-appeals.com by Martindale Hubbell [email protected] SYKES, BOURDON, AHERN & LEVY VIRGINIA BEACH Virginia Lawyer The Official Publication of the Virginia State Bar December 2013 Volume 62 / Number 5 Features LAW LIBRARIES 15 Law Libraries and Options Galore 45 Increasing Your “App”titude: Legal Research Apps by Gail F. Zwirner for Virginia Practitioners by Marie Summerlin Hamm 16 Appellate Research Lessons from the Judges by Benjamin A. Doherty 49 A Much Debated Debt: The Virginia –West Virginia Debt Controversy 20 Discovering E-Discovery: a Resources Guide by Gregory H. Stoner by Timothy L. Coggins 53 Virginia CLE Sources: Important Practitioner 24 Solving Your Ethical Conundrums: Researching Tools for Forty Years the Rules of Professional Conduct by Gail F. Zwirner by Joyce Manna Janto VIRGINIA LAW FOUNDATION 30 The VLF Celebrates Forty Years of Philanthropy 39 VLF Grant Fuels JusticeServer Expansion by James V. Meath and Manuel A. Capsalis by Alexandra S. Fannon 32 One Barn at a Time (Being Good and Doing Great) 41 Public Service Internship Program: An Investment by Raymond M. White in the Community and Future Lawyers by Dana M. Fallon 34 Center Spreads the Rule of Law Project by G.
    [Show full text]