The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Andrews v. Richmond Redev't & Housing Auth.
No. 150977Supreme Court of Virginia
150977 Andrews v. Richmond Redev't & Housing Auth. 06/02/2016 In an employment termination case in which the plaintiff filed a grievance and a hearing officer ordered her reinstatement to employment with a pub…
The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.The activity
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The source
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
150977 Andrews v. Richmond Redev't & Housing Auth. 06/02/2016 In an employment termination case in which the plaintiff filed a gr…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- June 2, 2016
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Official docket
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
Docket entry
150977 Andrews v. Richmond Redev't & Housing Auth. 06/02/2016 In an employment termination case in which the plaintiff filed a grievance and a hearing officer ordered her reinstatement to employment with a public housing authority, the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review that disposition. The housing authority's grievance procedure is not controlled by Code § 15.2-1507, but instead by the State Grievance Procedure. Provisions of Code § 2.2-3006 make clear that either party may appeal a hearing officer's decision to circuit court for review on grounds that it is contradictory to law, but no such right is available when the challenge to the decision presents a question…
Open court document ↗Rulings in this case over time
Courts at different levels and stages can reach different results in the same case. Each entry is the court's own record; read it before drawing a conclusion.
No official record has been found at this time. We are watching for updates.
Method: an entry is marked with an outcome only when its own text contains the outcome word, and the word is shown beside it. Orders, opinions and judgments whose text does not say are marked Other. Party filings, notices and routine procedural orders (appearances, extra pages, time extensions, scheduling) are not listed; 1 such entry was left out of this case. No link between this case and any other case is recorded in our data, so only this case's own record is shown. Open the court's docket
Documents and links