Morgan v. Russrand Triangle Associates
Supreme Court of Virginia
1Opinion of the Court
LACY, Justice.
In this case, the trial court entered an order nunc pro tunc more than 21 days after the entry of a final order, explaining that the entry of the final order was "inadvertent" and therefore a clerical error capable of correction pursuant to Code § 8.01-428(B). We conclude that Code § 8.01-428(B) did not authorize the trial court to enter its nunc pro tunc order because entry of the final order was not a clerical error and the nunc pro *590 tunc order did not correct the record to reflect the actual acts of the trial court.
Facts
Russrand Triangle Associates, L.L.C. (Russrand) and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Davis v. MullinsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1996
- Super Fresh Food Markets of Virginia, Inc. v. RuffinSupreme Court of Virginia · 2002
- School Board v. Caudill Rowlett Scott, Inc.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1989
- Wellmore Coal Corp. v. Harman Mining Corp.Supreme Court of Virginia · 2002
- Dorn v. DornSupreme Court of Virginia · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Westgate v. Philip Richardson Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Virginia · 2005
- In Re Com.Supreme Court of Virginia · 2009
- Belew v. Com.Supreme Court of Virginia · 2012
- Dillard's, Inc. v. JudkinsSupreme Court of Virginia · 2008
- In re EjiguFairfax County Circuit Court · 2009
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.