Landini v. Bil-Jax

8/9/2019 Landini v. Bil-Jax

1/3

VIRGINIA

the

tf owd

r ~

k i

the

t f o w d ? I J ~

in the

t f W y o ~ l Y n Friday the 30th

ckyO January,

2015.

Neil

Landini ,

e t a l . , Appel lants ,

aga ins t

Record No.

140591

Circu i t

Court

No. CL12-062

Bil

Jax,

Inc . , e t a l . ,

Appel lees .

Upon an appeal from a

judgment rendered by the Circu i t

Court

o f

Powhatan

County.

Upon

cons ide ra t ion t the record ,

br i e f s , and

argument

of

counsel ,

the Court

i s

of

opinion

t h a t t he re

i s

no e r ro r i n the

judgment

o f

the c i r c u i t cour t .

Nei l Landini

and VACORP (co l l ec t ive ly

"Landini")

sought

to

br ing a persona l

i n ju r y ac t i o n

aga ins t B i l - J ax , Inc . , The Haulo t te

Group, and James

C.

Pemberton Corp (co l l ec t ive ly lithe

Defendants")

.

The a l l eged

i n ju r y

occurred on September 9,

2008.

On

September

2,

2010

Landini

mailed a

complaint to

the Clerk

o f

the

Circu i t Court

fo r Powhatan County with a

check

in the amount o f $344 to pay the

assoc ia t ed f i l i ng fees . The package was

rece ived

the

next day,

September 3, 2010.

On

September

9, 2010, the da te on which

the

s t a t u t e of l imi t a t ions exp i red , the Clerk informed Landini t h a t

the

check fo r the f i l i ng fee was $2

shor t . Landini mai led

a check fo r

• V CORP provides worker ' s compensat ion coverage to the Powhatan

County School Board

and

i t s employees. Landini a l leges t h a t he was

i n ju red

while performing

h i s

d u t i e s

as

an a s s i s t a n t

band

d i r e c t o r

employed by Powhatan County School Board. V CORP

asse r t s

a

r igh t

o f

subrogat ion with re spec t to any damages

r ecovered by

Landini as

a r e s u l t o f h is persona l i n ju r y su i t .


2/3

the $2

def ic iency ,

and

the

Clerk

f i l ed the

a c t i o n on

September

13,

2010.

Landini

subsequent ly

took

a

voluntary nonsui t

on

November

7,

2011

and

r e f i l e d the

ac t ion on

Apri l 2, 2012.

The

Defendants

f i l ed

p leas

in bar ,

a s s e r t i ng t ha t the s u i t

should

be dismissed as t ime-bar red because the i n i t i a l complaint

was not f i l ed with in

the two-year

s t a t u t e of

l imi t a t ions imposed

by

Code § 8.01 243(A). Afte r a hear ing ,

the

t r i a l

cour t sus t a ined the

Defendants '

pleas in bar

and

dismissed the

a c t i o n with

pre jud i ce .

Landini

subsequent ly f i l ed

a Motion to Rehear,

a t t r ibu t ing

the $2

def i c i ency

to

the

l i b ra ry

assessment col l ec t ed under Code

42.1

70.

Landini argued

t ha t the

a c t i o n was

t imely f i l e d because Code

17.1-275(A)

(13), which l i s t s

the

c l e rk ' s

fees

to

be paid

a t the

t ime of

f i l i ng , does

not requi re

payment

of the

l i b ra ry

fee . Thus,

Landini

concluded, the

Clerk should

have f i l ed the

complaint

on

September

3, 2010, the

da te

t was

received ,

desp i t e

the

$2

def i c i ency in the l i b r a r y assessment . The

t r i a l

cour t

denied

the

Motion

to

Rehear,

f ind ing

t ha t

the

l i b r a r y

fee

i s

incorpora ted in to

those

fees to be col l ec t ed by

the

c le rk a t the t ime

of

f i l i ng ,

pursuant

to Code

§ 17.1-275(0) .

Code 17.1-275(A)

(13)

l i s t s the c l e r k ' s fees

for

c i v i l

ac t ions asse r t i ng

cla ims

fo r monetary

damages, concluding wi th

the

fol lowing

requirement: liThe

fees presc r ibed

above s ha l l be

col l ec t ed upon the f i l i n g of papers fo r

the commencement

of

c i v i l

ac t ions .

Noting the absence

of

the l i b ra ry

fee among those fees

prescr ibed

above, Landini

mainta ins t ha t the l i b r a r y

fee

need

not

be

paid a t the t ime of f i l i ng . However,

Code 17.1-275(0)

commands t ha t [ i ] n accordance with 42.1-70,

the

c le rk

s ha l l

co l l ec t fees under subdiv i s ion[] A 13

to

be des igna ted

2


3/3

for publ ic

law

l i b r a r i e s . Given t h i s express i n t eg ra t ion ,

Landini ' s

argument

f a i l s .

The l i b r a ry

fee

i s

to

be

co l l e c t ed

with

the c l e r k ' s

fee assessed

under

Code §

17.1-275 A) 13),

a t

the

t ime

of

f i l i ng .

Thus,

because the l i b r a ry

fee was not tendered in

fu l l

un t i l

a f t e r

the

exp i ra t ion

of the

l imi t a t ions per iod ,

Landin i ' s

s u i t

was not t imely f i l e d .

For t h i s

reason,

we wi l l a f f i rm the judgment of the Circu i t

Court

of

Powhatan County.

This

order

s ha l l be c e r t i f i e d

to

the

s a id

c i r c u i t cour t .

A

Copy,

Teste:

Clerk

3

Documents

Landini v. Bil-Jax