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.
7 Virginia opinions name it 2 courts 2008–2022 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University v. Quesenberrygreen2 sentences2020Nevertheless, for the reasons stated, neither the interpretation of an agency’s -6- “On appeal from a state employee grievance decision, courts are bound by the factual findings of the hearing officer and may only reverse or modify the decision if it is ‘contradictory to law.’” Osburn v. Va. Dep’t of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 295 Va. 10, 17 (2018) (quoting Va. Polytechnic Inst. & State Univ. v. Quesenberry, 277 Va. 420, 429 (2009)). “[W]hether a decision is contradictory to law, including the meaning of any underlying statutes, [is] reviewed de novo.” Id. 2020Nevertheless, for the reasons stated, neither the interpretation of an agency’s -6- “On appeal from a state employee grievance decision, courts are bound by the factual findings of the hearing officer and may only reverse or modify the decision if it is ‘contradictory to law.’” Osburn v. Va. Dep’t of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 295 Va. 10, 17 (2018) (quoting Va. Polytechnic Inst. & State Univ. v. Quesenberry, 277 Va. 420, 429 (2009)). “[W]hether a decision is contradictory to law, including the meaning of any underlying statutes, [is] reviewed de novo.” Id. | 4 | 5 |
Osburn v. Va. Dep't of Alcoholic Beverage Controlgreen2 sentences2022“On appeal from a state employee grievance decision, courts are bound by the factual findings of the hearing officer and may only reverse or modify the decision if it is ‘contradictory to law.’” Osburn v. Va. Dep’t of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 295 Va. 10, 17 (2018). 2022“On appeal from a state employee grievance decision, courts are bound by the factual findings of the hearing officer and may only reverse or modify the decision if it is ‘contradictory to law.’” Osburn v. Va. Dep’t of Alcoholic Beverage Control, 295 Va. 10, 17 (2018). | 4 | 4 |
Tatum v. Virginia Department of Agriculture & Consumer Servicesgreen2 sentences2022“The appealing party must ‘identify [a] constitutional provision, statute, regulation or judicial decision which the [hearing officer’s] decision contradicted.’” Quesenberry, 277 Va. at 429 (alterations in original) (quoting Tatum v. Va. Dept. of Agric., 41 Va. App. 110, 122 (2003)). 2022“The appealing party must ‘identify [a] constitutional provision, statute, regulation or judicial decision which the [hearing officer’s] decision contradicted.’” Quesenberry, 277 Va. at 429 (alterations in original) (quoting Tatum v. Va. Dept. of Agric., 41 Va. App. 110, 122 (2003)). | 3 | 4 |
Jones v. Board Of Governors Of The University Of North Carolinagreen1 sentence2014Hayden “neither alleged nor argued that [s]he relied on the ‘assurances [of] governmental officers which have induced reasonable and detrimental reliance.’” Id. at 437, 706 S.E.2d at 337 (quoting Jones, 704 F.2d at 717). 2 Code § 2.2-3005.1(C) requires: The decision of the hearing officer shall (i) be in writing, (ii) contain findings of fact as to the material issues in the case and the basis for those findings, including any award of reasonable attorney fees pursuant to this section, and (iii) be final and binding if consistent with law and policy. -4- This holding is contrary to the factual | 1 | 1 |
Virginia Department of State Police v. Bartongreen1 sentence2008See id. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lee v. City of Norfolk
green
1 sentence2014Hayden “neither alleged nor argued that [s]he relied on the ‘assurances [of] governmental officers which have induced reasonable and detrimental reliance.’” Id. at 437, 706 S.E.2d at 337 (quoting Jones, 704 F.2d at 717). 2 Code § 2.2-3005.1(C) requires: The decision of the hearing officer shall (i) be in writing, (ii) contain findings of fact as to the material issues in the case and the basis for those findings, including any award of reasonable attorney fees pursuant to this section, and (iii) be final and binding if consistent with law and policy. -4- This holding is contrary to the factual | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.