There’s too much going on this week to focus on work, so please indulge me if this post strays a little off topic.
On television, we welcome back the two best shows going, Mad Men and the absurdly NSFW Game of Thrones.
Over shady internet streams, we get to watch an uber-talented U.S.
The Supreme Court of Virginia handed down 20 published opinions and 1 published order last session.
One of those opinions, Galumbeck v. Lopez, contains enough waiver for the entire term. It’s the most waiverlicious opinion I can remember seeing since Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner v. Target Corp., 274 Va. 341 (2007). Galumbeck suggests that, to borrow a phrase from Frank Friedman, we are living through a veritable waiver renaissance. 
Exciting times, indeed.
And if trial lawyers are going to compete in this waive–err, brave–new world, they need to know the rules.
So, on that note, a quick stroll through some of the waiver issues in Galumbeck:
First, Galumbeck complains that he was not allowed to question witnesses about a surgical log or introduce that surgical log into evidence as a sanction for discovery misconduct.
Unfortunately, all of the relevant discussions were held in a sidebar conference.
It’s a testament to how customs vary across the state that I literally did not know that people still held sidebars until reading this opinion. I thought that only happened in movies. And after reading Galumbeck, I’m pretty sure that sidebars should, in fact, only happen in movies.Continue Reading Galumbeck v. Lopez: Supreme Court of Virginia Catches Some Waives