The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Richardson v. Braxton-Bailey
No. 980324Supreme Court of Virginia
980324 Richardson v. Braxton-Bailey 01/08/1999 In this personal injury damages case, the dispositive issue was the quality of the evidence, not the proximity between the amount of the verdict and the special d…
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.
980324 Richardson v. Braxton-Bailey 01/08/1999 In this personal injury damages case, the dispositive issue was the quality of the…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- January 8, 1999
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
980324 Richardson v. Braxton-Bailey 01/08/1999 In this personal injury damages case, the dispositive issue was the quality of the evidence, not the proximity between the amount of the verdict and the special damages claimed. Based on this record, the jury was entitled to believe that not all the damages claimed by the plaintiff were incurred as a result of the accident. Therefore, the trial court erred in setting the verdict aside. That judgment is reversed and the jury verdict reinstated.
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
Reversed
The court's record, as written
980324 Richardson v. Braxton-Bailey 01/08/1999 In this personal injury damages case, the dispositive issue was the quality of the evidence, not the proximity between the amount of the verdict and the special damages claimed. Based on this record, the jury was entitled to believe that not all the damages claimed by the plaintiff were incurred as a result of the accident. Therefore, the trial court erred in setting the verdict aside. That judgment is reversed and the jury verdict reinstated.
Outcome words in this text: reversed.
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