SAMPLE MOTION TO DISMISS VIRGINIA PRO
SAMPLE MOTION TO DISMISS VIRGINIA CODE
SAMPLE MOTION TO DISMISS VIRGINIA TRIAL

“If the petition for appeal does not contain such a statement, the appeal will be dismissed.” Rule 5:17(c)(2)(ii).

SAMPLE MOTION TO DISMISS VIRGINIA CODE

Pursuant to Code § 17.1-410(A)(3) and (B), the Court of Appeals’ decision in this case is final and “without appeal to the Supreme Court” unless the decision “involves a substantial constitutional question as a determinative issue or matters of significant precedential value.” Further, under Rule 5:17(c)(2), Barrett’s petition for appeal must include “a statement setting forth in what respect the decision of the Court of Appeals” presents an issue that satisfies this statutory prerequisite to our considering his appeal (“jurisdictional statement”). For the reasons stated below, we grant the motion to dismiss, deny Barrett’s motion for sanctions, and sanction Barrett pursuant to Code § 8.01-271.1. On February 12, 2020, we issued a Rule to Show Cause against Barrett, directing him to show cause why this Court should not sanction him pursuant to Code § 8.01-271.1. Barrett also moves for sanctions to be imposed on Minor.

Barrett opposes the motion to dismiss, asserting that the entirety of his petition for appeal constitutes a sufficient statement for purposes of Rule 5:17(c)(2) and that, in any event, this Court has jurisdiction to consider his appeal under the Supremacy Clause in the United States Constitution. Minor moves to dismiss the appeal, arguing the jurisdictional statement in Barrett’s petition for appeal is insufficient under Rule 5:17(c)(2) and that the appeal does not involve the requisite substantial constitutional question or a matter of significant precedential value, as required by Code § 17.1-410(B).

SAMPLE MOTION TO DISMISS VIRGINIA TRIAL

Barrett challenges the judgment of the Court of Appeals affirming the trial court’s (1) denial of a series of motions filed by Barrett, (2) determination of a reasonable amount of attorney’s fees to award Valerie Jill Rhudy Minor, which she incurred during litigation related to the custody and visitation of Barrett’s and Minor’s children, and (3) award of $6,300 in additional fees to Minor. From the Court of Appeals of Virginia In this appeal, Timothy M. BEFORE: Lemons, C.J., Goodwyn, Powell, and McCullough, JJ., and Koontz, S.J. VIRGINIA: In the Supreme Court of Virginia held at the Supreme Court Building in the City of Richmond on Tuesday the 16th day of June, 2020.

SAMPLE MOTION TO DISMISS VIRGINIA PRO

The Supreme Court held (1) Plaintiff's jurisdictional statement did not satisfy Rule 5:17(c)(2) (2) Plaintiff's conduct warranted the sanction of Plaintiff paying Defendant's reasonable attorney's fees in costs and (3) Plaintiff shall be prohibited from filing in the Supreme Court any pleading or paper against Defendant without obtaining the services of a practicing Virginia attorney or obtaining leave of the Court to file any pro se pleading.

The appeal challenged the court of appeals' judgment affirming the trial court's (1) denial of a series of motions filed by Plaintiff, (2) determination of the amount of attorney's fees to award Defendant in connection with litigation related to the custody and visitation of the parties' children, and (3) award of additional fees to Defendant. This appeal was the latest in a series of 'habitually frivolous' litigation Plaintiff initiated against Plaintiff as a part of a continual effort to contest child custody, visitation, and support orders. Code 8.01-271.1, holding that Plaintiff's jurisdictional statement did not satisfy Rule 5:17(c)(2) and that Plaintiff's conduct merited sanctions. The Supreme Court granted Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's appeal from the judgment of the court of appeals, denied Plaintiff's motion for sanctions, and sanctioned Plaintiff pursuant to Va.

Sample motion to dismiss virginia