Conyers v. Martial Arts World

2 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. Timber Trespass, and a Modern Primer on Virginia Principles of Statutory Interpretation

    Norman A. Thomas, PLLCNorman ThomasOctober 10, 2017

    It then neatly framed several guiding interpretive principles:When the language of a statute is unambiguous, we are bound by the plain meaning of that language…We must give effect to the legislature's intention as expressed by the language unless a literal interpretation of the language would result in a manifest absurdity…When the words of a statute are unambiguous, we accord the statutory language its plain meaning…If a statute is subject to more than one interpretation, this Court must "apply the interpretation that will carry out the legislative intent behind the statute." [Conyers v. Martial Arts World of Richmond, Inc., 273 Va. 96, 104, 639 S.E.2d 174, 178 (2007)]. As the prevailing party at trial, Garvey is entitled to have the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to her, with all conflicts and inferences resolved in her favor. [Clarification to citation added; other citations omitted].On the issue of “legal costs,” and whether the statutory phrase includes attorneys fees, the Court noted Virginia’s adherence to the “American Rule.”

  2. Timber Trespass, and a Modern Primer on Virginia Principles of Statutory Interpretation

    Norman A. Thomas, PLLCNorman A. ThomasJanuary 1, 2016

    It then neatly framed several guiding interpretive principles:When the language of a statute is unambiguous, we are bound by the plain meaning of that language…We must give effect to the legislature's intention as expressed by the language unless a literal interpretation of the language would result in a manifest absurdity…When the words of a statute are unambiguous, we accord the statutory language its plain meaning…If a statute is subject to more than one interpretation, this Court must "apply the interpretation that will carry out the legislative intent behind the statute." [Conyers v. Martial Arts World of Richmond, Inc., 273 Va. 96, 104, 639 S.E.2d 174, 178 (2007)]. As the prevailing party at trial, Garvey is entitled to have the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to her, with all conflicts and inferences resolved in her favor. [Clarification to citation added; other citations omitted].On the issue of “legal costs,” and whether the statutory phrase includes attorneys fees, the Court noted Virginia’s adherence to the “American Rule.”