The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Nelson v. Great Eastern Resort Management
No. 020680Supreme Court of Virginia
020680 Nelson v. Great Eastern Resort Management 01/10/2003 In a personal injury case brought against the proprietors of a "snow tubing" recreational facility, the trial court erred in instructing the jury tha…
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.
020680 Nelson v. Great Eastern Resort Management 01/10/2003 In a personal injury case brought against the proprietors of a "snow …
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- January 10, 2003
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
020680 Nelson v. Great Eastern Resort Management 01/10/2003 In a personal injury case brought against the proprietors of a "snow tubing" recreational facility, the trial court erred in instructing the jury that the owner/operator of a recreational facility owed no duty to protect a voluntary participant from the "inherent risks" of the recreational activity in which the participant was injured. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial.
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.
1 entry, oldest first.
· Supreme Court of Virginia
ReversedRemanded
The court's record, as written
020680 Nelson v. Great Eastern Resort Management 01/10/2003 In a personal injury case brought against the proprietors of a "snow tubing" recreational facility, the trial court erred in instructing the jury that the owner/operator of a recreational facility owed no duty to protect a voluntary participant from the "inherent risks" of the recreational activity in which the participant was injured. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial.
Outcome words in this text: reversed, remanded.
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. 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