Law Commons^™

A Strange Land And A Peculiar Problem: Using Local Knowledge To Resolve Ambiguous Property Descriptions In Appalachia, William L. Spotswood

William & Mary Law Review Online

Conveying property in Appalachia can be somewhat like a box of chocolates: “You never know what you’re gonna get.” Carved by ancient rivers and winding streams, the seemingly never-ending “hollers” and hills of Appalachia can disorient even the best navigator. Couple the region’s rugged topography with an already ambiguous demarcation system, and properties once mapped by metes and bounds descriptions become impossible to re-create with any sort of certainty. Thus, though rooted in a desire for clarity, the combination of mountainous terrain and imperfect demarcation results in a property system riddled with ambiguity. Due to this inherent definitional problem in …

Virginia Uranium, Inc. V. Warren, Nyles G. Greer

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States recently ruled that the Atomic Energy Act did not preempt a Virginia law prohibiting uranium mining in the Commonwealth. The Court held that although the Act delegated substantial power over the nuclear life cycle to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, it offered no indication that Congress sought to strip states of their traditional power to regulate mining on private lands within their borders.

This Land Is Your Land? Survey Delegation Laws As A Compensable Taking, Doug Chapman

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

While every state in the Union has a statute delegating in some form surveying authority to private entities, the practice has been especially visible and controversial due to pipeline construction in the Commonwealth of Virginia. A major point of contention in pipeline development has centered upon the ability of private companies to use delegated eminent domain powers to survey land for possible future development. While recent decisions by both a federal Virginia District Court and the state’s Supreme Court have upheld the state’s surveying delegation law from landowner challenges, the issue is far from resolved. Virginia therefore provides an ideal …

The Evolution Of E-Commerce In Virginia Real Property Transactions, Ronald D. Wiley Jr.

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Wills, Trusts, And Estates, J. William Gray Jr., Katherine E. Ramsey

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reform Virginia's Civil Asset Forfeiture Laws To Remove The Profit Incentive And Curtail The Abuse Of Power, Rob Poggenklass

University of Richmond Law Review

Part I of this article will review the historical roots of civil asset

forfeiture law. Part II will provide a more modern history of these

laws and an overview of Virginia's current asset forfeiture

scheme. Part III will examine the criticism of Virginia's drugrelated

civil asset forfeiture laws and highlight due process concerns,

risk of abuse of power, and misallocation of priorities due

to the structure of these laws in Virginia. Finally, Part IV will

provide recommendations to reform Virginia's civil asset forfeiture

laws.

Wills, Trusts, And Estates, J. William Gray Jr., Katherine E. Ramsey

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Community Development Authorities, Andrew A. Painter

University of Richmond Law Review

Today, CDAs of varying sizes and purposes have been authorized by at least fourteen Virginia localities, and approximately twenty have issued bonds." Despite progress, CDAs occupy anarea of Virginia law largely in its infancy. Case law directly related to their use remains limited, and many localities remain uncertain about their use since the unique marriage of private development and public power inherent in the CDA process has, at times, fostered controversy and apprehension. While this article does not directly address the public policy implications of using CDAs to finance infrastructure, the author hopes this review will generate further ideas for …

Much Ado About Nothing Much: Protestant Episcopal Church In The Diocese Of Virginia V. Truro Church, Henry L. Chambers Jr., Isaac A. Mcbeth

University of Richmond Law Review

This essay reviews the issues the Supreme Court of Virginia resolved in Truro and notes important issues it did not resolve. Part II supplies the factual background and procedural history ofthe dispute. Part III summarizes the court's opinion and the reasoning underlying its determination that Virginia Code section57-9(A) is not applicable to this particular action. Part IV critiques the opinion, noting the issues the court resolved and how it resolved them. Part V briefly addresses issues that remain unresolved by the court's decision and discusses the implications of leaving those issues unresolved. Part VI presents the authors' conclusions.

Enforcing Money Judgments Against Personal Property In Virginia, Ralph G. Santos

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Comment: Who Should Have Title To Virginia Tidelands?, Kevin D. Norwood

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

Nominating Property For The Virginia Landmarks Register, Glenn S. Hayes

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

Insurance - Insurable Interest - Occupant Or Possessor Of Realty, Raymond H. Rapaport

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff sued upon an insurance policy, issued to her by the defendant, covering a building in which she was conducting a merchandising business. The building was owned in fee by the plaintiff's father-in-law, who had told the plaintiff that she might occupy it so long as she wished, and that he intended to deed it to her and her children. Held, plaintiff had an insurable interest in the building. Liverpool & London & Globe Ins. Co. v. Bolling, (Va. 1940) 10 S. E. (2d) 518.

Bills To Remove Cloud From Title--With Reference To The State Of The Authorities In Virginia And West Virginia, David C. Howard

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.