Preview:

VIRGINIA: In the Supreme Court of Virginia held at the Supreme Court Building in the City of Richmond on Friday, the 8th day of June, 2001. Darrell Lee Whiting, against Record No. 001133 Court of Appeals No. 1037-99-3 Appellee. Appellant,

Cynthia Jan Fisher Whiting,

Upon an appeal from a judgment rendered by the Court of Appeals of Virginia on the 11th day of April, 2000.

Upon consideration of the record, briefs, and argument of counsel, the Court is of opinion that there is error in the judgment appealed from. The proceedings and facts are undisputed and are fully set forth in the Court of Appeals' opinion. Va. App. 192, 526 S.E.2d 806 (2000). Whiting v. Whiting, 32

There, the Court of

Appeals held, inter alia, that the final decree of divorce entered by the Circuit Court of Alleghany County on January 18, 1985, was void ab initio "because husband received no notice of the final decree and never endorsed it." Id. at 197, 526 S.E.2d

at 808; see Rule 1:13 (endorsement of draft decree by, or reasonable notice of presentation thereof to, counsel of record required unless dispensed with by court). The Court of Appeals

further ruled that a pendente lite decree entered by the circuit

court on June 15, 1984, directing the husband to pay spousal support, remained in effect until the cause was ultimately dismissed from the docket by a valid court decree. Id.

After the Court of Appeals' decision, this Court held that a decree or order entered in violation of Rule 1:13 is merely voidable, not void ab initio. Napert v. Napert, 261 Va. 45, 540

S.E.2d 882 (2001); Singh v. Mooney, 261 Va. 48, 541 S.E.2d 549 (2001). A voidable decree or order is not subject to collateral

attack and must be challenged within 21 days of its entry pursuant to Rule 1:1, by a bill of review within the time prescribed by Code

Download 1001133.pdf

Virginia Law