Tehee v. Tehee

Fairfax County Circuit Court

Tehee v. Tehee

38 Va. Cir. 340, 1996 Va. Cir. LEXIS 72

CourtFairfax County Circuit Court

DecidedJanuary 31, 1996

DocketCase No. (Chancery) 137808

StatusPublished

This text of 38 Va. Cir. 340 (Tehee v. Tehee) 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.

Bluebook

Tehee v. Tehee, 38 Va. Cir. 340, 1996 Va. Cir. LEXIS 72 (Va. Super. Ct. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

By Judge Dennis J. Smith

Before the Court is Complainant’s Motion for Reconsideration of Attorney’s Fees incurred in a contempt proceeding. After fully reviewing counsel’s briefs, the Court has determined that it is without jurisdiction to modify the order pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 1:1; therefore, Complainant’s Motion is denied.

By decree dated December 1, 1995, the Court denied Complainant’s request for attorney’s fees incurred in bringing a Rule to Show Cause against Defendant. On December 21,1995, Complainant filed this Motion requesting the Court to reconsider its decision. Although Complainant filed her Motion within the requisite time period, this action alone did not operate to toll the 21-day limitation prescribed by the Rule. Rule 1:1 does not contemplate “that the mere filing or lodging of a paper with the clerk would have the effect of extending the time prescribed.” Harvey v. Telephone Company, 198 Va. 213, 218, 93 S.E.2d 309, 313 (1956). The Court’s decision became final on December 22, 1995, and the Court no longer retains jurisdiction to modify it.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By Judge Dennis J. Smith

Before the Court is Complainant’s Motion for Reconsideration of Attorney’s Fees incurred in a contempt proceeding. After fully reviewing counsel’s briefs, the Court has determined that it is without jurisdiction to modify the order pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 1:1; therefore, Complainant’s Motion is denied.

By decree dated December 1, 1995, the Court denied Complainant’s request for attorney’s fees incurred in bringing a Rule to Show Cause against Defendant. On December 21,1995, Complainant filed this Motion requesting the Court to reconsider its decision. Although Complainant filed her Motion within the requisite time period, this action alone did not operate to toll the 21-day limitation prescribed by the Rule. Rule 1:1 does not contemplate “that the mere filing or lodging of a paper with the clerk would have the effect of extending the time prescribed.” Harvey v. Telephone Company, 198 Va. 213, 218, 93 S.E.2d 309, 313 (1956). The Court’s decision became final on December 22, 1995, and the Court no longer retains jurisdiction to modify it.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 Va. Cir. 340, 1996 Va. Cir. LEXIS 72, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tehee-v-tehee-vaccfairfax-1996.