Narrative Opinion Summary
Petitions for rehearing en banc were filed by appellee Tom Delisle and Va R. T Construction, as well as the Uninsured Employers’ Fund, seeking to overturn the judgment issued on November 30, 2004. The Court granted these petitions, stayed the mandate from the November judgment, and reinstated the appeal on its docket. Both appellees are required to submit briefs according to Rule 5A:35, including a copy of the previously rendered opinion as an addendum to their opening briefs. Additionally, each appellee must provide six extra copies of the previously filed appendix to the Court clerk. If the appellant chooses to respond, they must file a single answering brief that addresses all issues raised by the appellees.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellant's Response to Rehearing Petitionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant may choose to respond to the issues raised by the appellees by filing a single answering brief.
Reasoning: If the appellant chooses to respond, they must file a single answering brief that addresses all issues raised by the appellees.
Filing Requirements under Rule 5A:35subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellees are required to submit briefs that include a copy of the previously rendered opinion as an addendum and six extra copies of the previously filed appendix.
Reasoning: Both appellees are required to submit briefs according to Rule 5A:35, including a copy of the previously rendered opinion as an addendum to their opening briefs. Additionally, each appellee must provide six extra copies of the previously filed appendix to the Court clerk.
Petition for Rehearing En Bancsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Court granted the petitions for rehearing en banc filed by the appellees, thereby staying the mandate of the previous judgment and reinstating the appeal on its docket.
Reasoning: The Court granted these petitions, stayed the mandate from the November judgment, and reinstated the appeal on its docket.