Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Virginia opinions name it 5 courts 1996–2003 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Virginia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Telco Communications v. an Apple a Daygreen1 sentence2000See Krantz, 245 Va. at 206 (finding that it was the use of ACCESS, a Virginia facility, to transmit negative comments about Krantz to United that constituted “an act... in this Commonwealth” within the meaning of Code § 8.01-328.1 (A)(3)); see Telco, 977 F. Supp. at 408 (holding that an element of the tortious act fit into the Krantz jurisdictional net because but for the use of internet service providers and users resident in Virginia, the publication requirement of the tort of defamation would not have been satisfied). | 1 | 1 |
Krantz v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n, Intern.green1 sentence2000See Krantz, 245 Va. at 206 (finding that it was the use of ACCESS, a Virginia facility, to transmit negative comments about Krantz to United that constituted “an act... in this Commonwealth” within the meaning of Code § 8.01-328.1 (A)(3)); see Telco, 977 F. Supp. at 408 (holding that an element of the tortious act fit into the Krantz jurisdictional net because but for the use of internet service providers and users resident in Virginia, the publication requirement of the tort of defamation would not have been satisfied). | 1 | 1 |
Loria v. Regelsongreen1 sentence1998The Circuit Court of the City of Richmond in Loria v. Regelson, 39 Va. Cir. 536, 537 (Richmond Cir. 1996), reached a similar conclusion holding: Defamation occurs when there is publication of a defamatoiy statement to a third party. | 1 | 1 |
Chalkley v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroadgreen1 sentence1998In Chalkley v. Atlantic Coastline Ry., 150 Va. 301, 334-35 (1928), the Supreme Court held that the dictating of a defamatoiy letter to a secretary in the corporation was not a publication sufficient to satisfy the publication requirement of a defamation action. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Moore v. Allied Chemical Corp.
green
2 sentences2003The single publication rule has been cited favorably by this and other Virginia Circuit Courts, e.g., Myska v. RMS Technologies, Inc., 25 Va. Cir. 344 (Fairfax 1991) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 577A(3)), and Moon v. CBS, Inc., 1 Va. Cir. 68 (Richmond City 1981), as well as by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Moore v. Allied Chemical Corp., 480 F. Supp. 364 (E.D. 2003The single publication rule has been cited favorably by this and other Virginia Circuit Courts, e.g., Myska v. RMS Technologies, Inc., 25 Va. Cir. 344 (Fairfax 1991) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 577A(3)), and Moon v. CBS, Inc., 1 Va. Cir. 68 (Richmond City 1981), as well as by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Moore v. Allied Chemical Corp., 480 F. Supp. 364 (E.D. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Myska v. RMS Technologies, Inc.
green
2 sentences2003An exception to the Weaver rule which has been accepted by a number of states and federal jurisdictions is known as the “single publication rule.” Under the single publication rule “any one edition of a book or newspaper, or any one radio or television broadcast, exhibition of a motion picture or similar aggregate communication is a single publication.” Myska v. RMS Technologies, Inc., 25 Va. Cir. 344 (Fairfax 1991) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 577A(3)). 2003The single publication rule has been cited favorably by this and other Virginia Circuit Courts, e.g., Myska v. RMS Technologies, Inc., 25 Va. Cir. 344 (Fairfax 1991) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 577A(3)), and Moon v. CBS, Inc., 1 Va. Cir. 68 (Richmond City 1981), as well as by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Moore v. Allied Chemical Corp., 480 F. Supp. 364 (E.D. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Davis v. Heflin
green
1 sentence2000Davis v. Heflin, 130 Va. 169 (1921). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
District Road Board of Center Magisterial District v. Spilman
green
1 sentence1996We stated that publication of the single amended section met “both the letter and spirit of the Constitution.” Id. at 206 , 84 S.E. at 104 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.