Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Barr v. SW Rodgers Co., Inc.

Court of Appeals of Virginia

Decided December 5, 2000No. 1382992Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBenton, Judge

I concur in Part I and the portion of Part II holding that the Commissioner was not required to file a bill of complaint immediately upon notice of contest. Therefore, I would also reverse and remand this matter to the trial judge.

I would not decide the issue of prejudice, however, because the record does not establish that the parties had an opportunity to litigate that issue in the circuit court. As the majority notes, “we have not previously addressed” the meaning of the statute. Moreover, nothing on the face of the statute alerts the parties or the trial judge that prejudice is an…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Niese v. KlosSupreme Court of Virginia · 1976
  2. Monacan Hills, Inc. v. PageSupreme Court of Virginia · 1961

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API