Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Adams v. Cowan (1)
- Allied Productions v. Duesterdick (1)
- Cain v. Rea (1)
- Carr v. Union Church of Hopewell (1)
- Catlett v. Hawthorne (1)
-
- Contracts (1)
- Cramer v. Commonwealth (1)
- Dean Muse (1)
- Fitzgerald v. Doggett's Executor (1)
- Forsberg v. Zehm (1)
- Glenn v. Haynes (1)
- Goodstein v. Allen (1)
- Goodstein v. Weinberg (1)
- Hawthorne v. Austin Organ Co. (1)
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. Price (1)
- Oleyar v. Kerr (1)
- Owens v. Bank of Glade Spring (1)
- Paternalistic courts (1)
- Pidgeon v. Williams (1)
- Protestant Episcopal Church (1)
- Richmond Home for Ladies (1)
- Rohr v. Richmond (1)
- Solicitations of Contributions Act (1)
- St. Stephen's Episcopal Church v. Morris (1)
- Stephens v. White (1)
- Sunday Closing Law (1)
- Torts (1)
- Virginia Code (1)
- Virginia Declaration of Rights (1)
- Virginia Military Institute v. King (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Contracts
Supplementing The Functional Test Of Prosecutorial Immunity, Anthony J. Luppino
Supplementing The Functional Test Of Prosecutorial Immunity, Anthony J. Luppino
Faculty Works
No abstract provided.
Virginia Laws Affecting Churches - Restated, J. Rodney Johnson
Virginia Laws Affecting Churches - Restated, J. Rodney Johnson
University of Richmond Law Review
Twenty-five years ago, the late William T. Muse, then Dean of the University of Richmond School of Law, observed that although there was considerable law in Virginia relating to churches this law was widely scattered throughout the statutes and the cases. To remedy this state of affairs, Dean Muse wrote a concise but complete summary of these laws. In the quarter-century that has elapsed since Dean Muse's article was published, Virginia has adopted a new constitution, many church-related statutes have been enacted and a number of church-related cases have been decided, some of which have refined established principles and others …
Distributive And Paternalist Motives In Contract And Tort Law, With Special Reference To Compulsory Terms And Unequal Bargaining Power, Duncan Kennedy
Distributive And Paternalist Motives In Contract And Tort Law, With Special Reference To Compulsory Terms And Unequal Bargaining Power, Duncan Kennedy
Maryland Law Review
No abstract provided.
Legal Malpractice In Virginia: Tort Or Contract?, R. Paul Childress Jr.
Legal Malpractice In Virginia: Tort Or Contract?, R. Paul Childress Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
A client who attempts to recover from an attorney does so because the client feels that the attorney has acted negligently. The concepts of standard of care, negligence, and damages are usually associated with actions in tort. However, while an examination of applicable Virginia law reveals that concepts usually associated with tort apply to legal malpractice, the presence of elements of negligence does not always equal tort.