I spent the weekend in chilly Williamsburg, attending my first VTLA convention. The convention featured two appellate presentations, one from John Davidson and another from Roger Creager. Both were excellent. John probably had a slight advantage, because his came with lunch, but I’d like to pick up on a point that Roger made: the
Tips From Tommy, Part III: Strelka Calls an Audible
In Part III of our continuing series, former Supreme Court of Virginia clerk Tommy Strelka shares some things he learned during his recent clerkship. Today, Tommy attacks considers oral argument:
- This ain’t no jury trial. It’s just you, the other attorney, and the Court. And though there may be several Judges or Justices, they are
United Leasing Corp. v. Lehner Family Business Trust: When Renewing Your Motion to Strike, Do Not Renew Your Motion to Strike
Don’t look now, but the Supreme Court of Virginia may have just redefined clarified the way you argue a motion to strike at the close of all of the evidence. Trial types may want to take some time to read over one of last session’s most important opinions, United Leasing Corporation v. Lehner Family Business Trust.
United Leasing is a breach of contract case. The plaintiff, the Lehner Family Business Trust, was not actually a party to the contract; one of the parties attempted to assign its claims to the Trust, and the validity of that assignment would play a major role in the litigation.
The parties went to trial before a jury. At the close of the Trust’s case in chief, United Leasing moved to strike on two grounds:
- The Trust had failed to prove an assignment; and
- The Trust had failed to prove damages.
The trial court overruled United Leasing’s motion to strike. United Leasing put on its own evidence, and the Trust presented evidence in rebuttal. After the jury retired at the close of all of the evidence, counsel for United Leasing stated:
Renew my motion to strike. For the record, I wanted to renew my motion to strike.
Instead of addressing the motion to strike, the trial court spoke to counsel for a while about exhibits and jury instructions. After closing argument and after the jury began its deliberations, the trial court asked United Leasing about its renewed motion. At that point, United Leasing argued only that the Trust had failed to prove damages. It did not reargue the assignment issue.
The jury returned a $1.1 million verdict for the Trust. United Leasing appealed, arguing that the Trust had failed to prove an assignment.Continue Reading United Leasing Corp. v. Lehner Family Business Trust: When Renewing Your Motion to Strike, Do Not Renew Your Motion to Strike
General Assembly Elects Mims to Supreme Court of Virginia
Yesterday afternoon, the General Assembly unanimously elected William C. Mims to the Supreme Court of Virginia, effective April 1. The VLW Blog has the story, as does WaPo’s Virginia Politics Blog. The Richmond Times-Dispatch has a blurb, and carried a short editorial about Mims a few days ago. That editorial read, in
VLW Blog: Mims to Get Virginia Supreme Court Seat
Our friends at the VLW Blog are reporting that William C. Mims will replace departing Justice Barbara Milano Keenan on the Supreme Court of Virginia. Mims was introduced to a joint meeting of the House and Senate Courts of Justice Committees. Each committee must certify a candidate before that candidate can be considered by
Update: SCOTUS Grants Cert in Snyder v. Phelps
In September, we wrote about Snyder v. Phelps, the funeral-picketing case out of the Fourth Circuit.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court granted cert in Snyder. The case is getting plenty of attention from the mainstream media, as well as some treatment on De Novo favorites SCOTUSblog, the Volokh Conspiracy (which had roughly
Roberson v. Commonwealth, or Will Somebody Please Answer Justice Koontz’s Question?
One of the themes that we harp on here at De Novo is the importance of answering the Court”s questions. That usually comes up in oral argument, but sometimes, the Court is so kind as to direct the parties to brief certain issues.
That was the case in Roberson v. Commonwealth, handed down last session. Roberson and its companion case, Ghameshlouy v. Commonwealth, address some interesting but fairly esoteric questions of appellate jurisdiction, procedural defects, and waiver.
And in Roberson, it sounds like the Court really wanted to talk about waiver. At issue in the case was who was the proper appellee, the Commonwealth or the City of Virginia Beach. In its order granting the appeal, the Court directed both entities to appear, and specifically directed the City to address the question of whether it had made an appearance before the Court of Appeals. That could bear on whether it had waived its objection to the any procedural defect in the notice of appeal.Continue Reading Roberson v. Commonwealth, or Will Somebody Please Answer Justice Koontz’s Question?
Senate Confirms Justice (Now Judge) Keenan By 99-0 Vote
Virginia Lawyer’s Weekly reports that the U.S. Senate has unanmiously confirmed Justice Keenan for a seat on the Fourth Circuit. The Senate voted for cloture on her nomination this afternoon, then confirmed her by a 99-0 vote. Great news, and congratulations to the new Judge.
Now, about those other three vacancies . . .
Legal Writing Tips: I Am John Roberts and So Can You!
Ross Guberman of Legal Writing Pro has a fun piece, Five Ways to Write Like John Roberts, that’s worth checking out. In the essay, Guberman distills five writing lessons from Roberts’s brief in Alaska v. EPA. Those lessons are:
- Let your facts “show, not tell.”
- Add speed through short and varied transitions.
- Add