Surovell, Jackson, Colten & Dugan, P.C. v. Dawson
This text of 18 Va. Cir. 392 (Surovell, Jackson, Colten & Dugan, P.C. v. Dawson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Fairfax County Circuit Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The Court has considered the arguments made in connection with the Demurrer to the Motion for Judgment and is of the opinion that the Demurrer should be overruled as to both counts.
Murray v. Hadid, 238 Va. 722 (1989), in the Court’s view, is directed toward the limitations imposed by Rule 1:1 regarding jurisdiction of the Court to act in a given case rather than a limitation on a motion or action based upon § 8.01-271.1. As such, the case is not felt to be controlling in this matter.
Since § 8.01-271.1, Code of Virginia, (1950), as amended, does not indicate that a request for relief thereunder must be made in the same action in which the prohibited conduct took place, such a restriction imposed by the Court would constitute judicial legislation. As such, and since the Court must accept the allegations of the Motion for Judgment as true for purposes of the Demurrer, Duggin v. Adams, 234 Va. 221 (1987), the Demurrer is overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
18 Va. Cir. 392, 1990 Va. Cir. LEXIS 11, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/surovell-jackson-colten-dugan-pc-v-dawson-vaccfairfax-1990.