Defending Cases in General District Court
Written by Lindsey D. Hunt
Edited by Janeen B. Koch
With more and more cases being filed in General District Court these days, it is worth taking a closer look at the procedural and discovery rules that govern in that court.
Jurisdictional Limit/Advantages
The maximum amount that may be sued for in General District Court is $25,000. Circuit Courts may hear civil cases in which the amount in controversy is over $4,500 but many less serious property damage and personal injury cases are now being filed in General District Court. Cases in General District Court are heard and decided by the judge. There are no juries in General District Court. With the limited discovery available in General District Court (as discussed further below), trying cases in General District Court is generally less expensive and less time consuming. General District Courts are “courts not of record” which means that, unlike Circuit Court, there is no automatic recording of the proceedings. However, Rule 7A:6 provides that the court may allow recording of the proceedings by a court reporter or other means. If the defense believes the plaintiff will lose in General District Court, and that it’s likely the plaintiff will appeal, it is worth considering having a court reporter present to capture the plaintiff’s testimony. This testimony could then be used if the plaintiff attempts to provide inconsistent testimony on appeal.
Right to Nonsuit
One of the often frustrating aspects of civil defense practice, in both General District Court and Circuit Court, is the right of nonsuit. Virginia Code Section 8.01-380 provides that a party who has filed suit has an absolute right to one nonsuit. A nonsuit is a voluntary dismissal or withdrawal of the case. The plaintiff may nonsuit nearly at any time, regardless of the amount of time, money, or effort that has been expended defending the suit. However, the plaintiff may not nonsuit the case in General District Court after a motion to strike has been granted or after the case has been submitted to the judge for a decision. Although it can be a frustrating part of practice in General District Court, when a case is nonsuited, there’s always a possibility that the plaintiff will not refile, or will miss the applicable deadline for refiling resulting in dismissal of the case. If the plaintiff chooses to refile the case after nonsuiting, the plaintiff must refile in the same court in which the nonsuit was taken, unless that court was without jurisdiction, not a proper venue, if “other good cause is shown for proceeding in another court,” or if the new case is instituted in a federal court. This means that in the majority of cases, a plaintiff who nonsuited in General District Court, must refile in the same General District Court.
Limited Discovery
Discovery is very limited in General District Court. Unlike discovery in Circuit Court, there are no written interrogatories, requests for production of documents, requests for admission, or depositions at the General District Court level. However, subpoenas duces tecum – requiring production of documents – can be issued by either party in a civil case.
Limited Pleadings
Two important mechanisms for obtaining additional information about a case that are available, and in many cases, should be utilized, are the Bill of Particulars and Grounds of Defense. Rule 7B:2 of the Supreme Court of Virginia provides that the judge may “require the plaintiff to file and serve a written bill of particulars.” Often, cases in General District Court begin with the filing of a Warrant in Debt. This form document is filed by the plaintiff and served on the defendant. The Warrant in Debt often provides little more than the general theory, for example “personal injuries from a car accident,” and, possibly the date of the accident. By requesting a Bill of Particulars, the defense can obtain a more detailed statement of the facts alleged by the plaintiff that form the basis of his or her claim.
Introduction of Medical Records and Bills by Affidavit
Trying personal injury cases in General District Court was made easier and less expensive with the enactment of Virginia Code Section 16.1-882. This section provides that parties “may present evidence as to the extent, nature, and treatment of the injury, the examination of the person so injured, and the costs of such treatment and examination” through reports, records, and bills, rather than live testimony of treating physicians, so long as certain requirements are met. Without this procedural mechanism, treating physicians or custodians of records would have to appear in court to testify if the plaintiff sought to introduce medical evidence.
According to 16.1-882, medical reports may be admitted if copies are given to opposing counsel along with an affidavit of the treating or examining health care provider that, in sum, (1) the person named in the report was treated or examined by the provider, (2) the information in the report is true and accurate, and (3) the costs stated are true and accurate; or through an affidavit by the custodian of records that the report is a true and accurate copy. Additionally, the party seeking to introduce the report must also provide opposing counsel with “written notice” of the party’s intention to present the evidence by use of a report. This written notice must be provided to opposing counsel “10 days in advance of trial.” Generally, it is the plaintiff who is trying to introduce evidence by way of a report. If defense counsel does not receive the reports, affidavit, and written notice of the plaintiff’s intention to introduce evidence of the injuries and treatment by way of reports, defense counsel can object to admission of those records at trial.
Records or bills from a hospital or medical facility may be similarly introduced, but copies, an affidavit of the custodian of records, and written notice of their intention to introduce the records or bills must also be presented to the opposing party.
Since the plaintiff’s claim for damages in a personal injury cases usually rests upon the plaintiff proving they were injured and costs of their treatment, failure by the plaintiff to provide the requisite and timely notice required by 16.1-882 can provide the defense with a key objection that could turn the case in the defendant’s favor or significantly reduce the amount of damages awarded.
On the other hand, the introduction of the plaintiff’s medical records, particularly medical records that pre-date the subject accident, can assist with the defendant’s argument that the plaintiff’s injuries were pre-existing and not causally related to the accident. In addition, the facts, data and opinions contained in the treatment records often contradict the plaintiff’s claims of injury, pain and suffering as a result of the accident. Therefore, it is always important for the defense to obtain all of the plaintiff’s medical records well prior to trial so that defense counsel can determine whether there is any helpful information contained in those records to support the defendant’s arguments at trial, or, in the alternative, whether strategically the defense should wait to see whether the plaintiff meets the statutory deadline for admission of such records and bills.