Vigil v. Walrach et al, No. 7:2015cv00063 - Document 38 (W.D. Va. 2015)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Michael F. Urbanski on 9/9/2015. (tvt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
' !4 FI ED L IN TH E UN ITED STA TES DIST RICT CO U R T FO R TH E W ESTER N D ISTRIC T O F V IRG IN I A ROANOKE DI SI VI ON FM N K V I I JR . G L, , Pl nt f , ai if V. JOH N W ALM CH,e aI, t . D ef endant . s ) ) ) ) ) ) ) sEP 29 2 : êb J A ULI Bx ci lAci No.7:5-v- 3 vi ton 1 : 0006 1 '. -, . t'F$. ? 4k .' $' U Ok' ' ' M EM O R AN DU M O PIN IO N By: H on.M i hae F.U r c l bans ki U nie St e D i t c Judge t d at s s ri t Fr nk Vi l J . aVigi a i aepr e ng pm K ,tl amoton f apr i i r a gi, r, r ni nm t oce di sed i or elm na y ij ci nbe a s hei trdo b i h u e i ahih s c rt sti ga Re On o S ae nun to c u e s ie f eng o s d n g -e u iy e t t d i n tt n Prs (ç ion ç ROSP' , c ma simo edit tt c ' whih ke t r fkul o ommuniat wihfmiy,fi , ) c e t a l rends and at n si Coo a o.A p ei nayijmci ni a û x ro dn r a dd a tcrme y' to wy n lrd rlmi r nt to s n i ta r ia y n r si e d . e ' M u fv.Gee 553U. 674,689- ( na rn, S. 90 2008) A mova mus esabls f l ee nt bef ea . nt t t ih otr lme s or p ei n r ijmci nma is e 1 h i lk l t s c e do temeis 2 h i lk l t s fe rlmiay n t to y su : ) e s iey o u c e n h rt; ) e s iey o u fr irpaa eha i t a e ofprlmi r rle ;3 t balnceofe testpsi hi fvor re rbl nn n he bsnce ei nay eif ) he a quii i n s a ; a d4 a ij ncin i i t p bl itrs.W itrv. tla Re . f Co n i.n .5 5U. n ) n nu to s n he u i n eet ne Nat l s De . u cll c, 5 S. c r 7, ( ) Pl ntf i notalowe t de taeonl al sbiiy'ofirpaa eha m 20 2008 . ai if s l d o monsrt y t i lt ' re rbl r pos b c u eta sa adi çn o sse twi ( )c a a trz to o ijmcier l fa a e a s h t tnd r s û c n itn t t h r ce iain f n t tv ei s n i h he e e r or na y r m e t m a onl be a r d upon a cea s wi t tt pl ntf i e il xta di r e dy hat y y wa de l r ho ng ha he ai if s ntted t s r le .'I a 23. o uch ei f' d. t Pl i iff ist esabls t the i lke y t s c d on t m e is ofhi c ai sa a ntf a l o t i h ha s i l o uc ee he rt s l m boutt he Vigil v. Walrach et al r src i condii ofc e titve tons onûneme a ROSP, wils f rtir pa a e'hn ort tt nt t he l ufe sre r bl ' nn, ha he Doc. 38 baa ofe testpsi hi f or antf f t rf ist e tbls how a or rr quii lnce quii i n s av .Pli if urhe a l o sa ih n de e rng Pl i ift be m ove t a l ss c e prs f t r t publc' i e es w he t ti t r ti a ntf o d o es e ur i on urhe s he i s nt r t n ha n e es s s r d by def r i t c r c i e ve e rng o or e tonalof i i l abou t a opra e sofm ai ai ng s c iy. fca s t he ppr i t nes nt ni e ur t Dockets.Justia.com Y Se e. ,1 U. C.j3626()2)Cç- c ts l gi s tntalwei t a ad rei t e. :. 8 S. a ( -he our hal ve ubsa i l ght o ny ves mpac o p b i s ft o t eo rto o ac i n lusies se c usdb t ep ei n r rle a d n u lc aey r h peai n f rmia j tc y tm a e y h r l ay eif n mi s lr s tt prncplsofc t ...) Belv.W olih,441U. 520,540n. 548n. hal epec he i i e omiy. ' ; l ' fs S. 23, 29 ( 979)(xpli ngt tmai ai ng sc iya o de a ope ai ani tt i i a 1 e ani ha nt ni e urt nd r r nd r tng nsiuton n ma ge bl f hi a econsde a i pe ula l wihi t pr ncea pr es i e rie na a e as on r i r tons c iry t n he ovi nd of sonal xpe ts ofc rctonsofii s.Acc di y,Pli iff l t s tsyt ee t fraprlmi r ore i fcal) or ngl antf ais o aif he lmens o ei nay ij n to , n h smoinf rap ei+ n r ijmcini d nid. n u ci n a d i to o r l a y nt to s e e mi E E Ti qé dyo NT R:hs a f ,05 2 1. > / /* ' + ?. &-' ' $, Unie St t sDiti tJ t d a e src udge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
