Virginia

Court Finds Virginia's Punitive Damages Cap Applies Per-Plaintiff in Charlottesville Case

Published

1 year ago

July 3, 2024

Court Finds Virginia's Punitive Damages Cap Applies Per-Plaintiff in Charlottesville Case

A federal appeals court has ruled that Virginia’s $350,000 punitive damages cap applies on a per-plaintiff basis in a case against white supremacists who organized the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville in August 2017.

A Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals panel in a 3-0 vote reversed a federal district court that had limited the punitive damages that the eight plaintiffs would receive to $350,000 aggregate. The appeals court found that in a case where there are multiple plaintiffs, the $350,000 cap applies to each plaintiff, not to the group as a whole.

In the opinion written by Chief Judge Albert Diaz, the appeals court rested its decision largely on the statute’s not mentioning plaintiffs and the fact that the state did not permit multiple plaintiff actions until well after the cap statute was drafted and enacted.

As a civil jury trial in 2022 proved, the protester-defendants — who included white nationalists, white supremacists, and neo-Nazis— conspired to commit racially motivated violence to, in part, “defend Western civilization and white men against perceived enemies—specifically, Jewish persons, Black persons, and their white gentile traitor allies.” The protesters “sought violence, planned for violence, sparked violence, engaged in violence, and afterwards, glorified the violence” committed.

The jury found the defendants guilty of civil conspiracy; racial, religious, or ethnic harassment under Virginia’s hate-crime statute; assault and battery; and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Jury Award

The jury’s damages award against the protester-defendants totaled over $26 million, split among compensatory damages which the district court assigned jointly and severally against the defendants, and a historic $24 million in punitive damages. The district court ultimately slashed the punitive damages to $350,000 by applying Virginia’s punitive damages cap across the eight plaintiffs who sought them.

Defendants Michael Hill, Michael Tubbs, League of the South, and Nathan Damigo challenged the district court’s decision to hold them jointly and severally liable for the $26 million in compensatory damages award, while the plaintiffs challenged the district court’s decision to apply Virginia’s punitive damages cap across all plaintiffs.

Because the jury found that all the defendants engaged in a conspiracy, the district court applied the collective compensatory damages. The Fourth Circuit found no error in this part of the district court’s decision.

The defendants also argued that Virginia’s punitive damages cap should apply to the jury’s punitive damages award, reducing them to $350,000, and that the damages were constitutionally excessive.

The plaintiffs’ argued that the punitive damages cap only applies in “run-of-the-mill” tort and insurance cases and not at all than in the hate-crime context. The plaintiffs’ fallback contention was that the cap applies on a per-plaintiff basis, with each plaintiff receiving $350,000.

The district court rejected the plaintiffs’ arguments that the punitive damages cap should not be applied at all and that the cap applies on a per-plaintiff basis.

The Fourth Circuit also rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that punitive damages statute does not apply to hate crimes. The court cited the plain language of the statute that says it applies to ‘all actions” and not just some actions. The court noted that Virginia passed its hate-crime statute only a year after passing its punitive damages cap. It therefore had an opportunity to exclude hate crimes from the cap’s purview but it didn’t.

However, citing history, statute language and public policy, the Fourth Circuit agreed with the plaintiffs that the cap applies per-plaintiff.

The statute says in part that the “total amount awarded for punitive damages against all defendants found to be liable shall be determined by the trier of fact. In no event shall the total amount awarded for punitive damages exceed $350,000.”

First the appeals court noted that the punitive damages statute doesn’t include similar “all plaintiffs” language as it does “all defendants” and the court believes there are good reasons for that legislative drafting. If lawmakers meant to treat defendants and plaintiffs equally under the statute, even with the “all defendants” qualifier, that would render that term superfluous.

Another reason relates to the state’s historical understanding of joinder. and the fact that when the punitive damages cap was enacted in 1987 the common law largely didn’t permit separate plaintiffs to jointly adjudicate their claims. So an “action” was typically one plaintiff prosecuting one claim. There were no multiple plaintiff actions.

Virginia adhered to this common-law approach until 1995, when the General Assembly permitted a court to join separate actions, or six or more plaintiffs to join in a single action. But these joinder principles were enacted after the punitive damages cap passed in 1987.

“As a matter of text and history then, the General Assembly could not have contemplated including a multi-plaintiff limitation in the punitive damages cap because single-plaintiff actions were the norm,” the appeals court explained.

Furthermore, the court found that a per- plaintiff reading serves public policy interests by incentivizing plaintiffs to join their claims where appropriate. “Were we to hold otherwise, any plaintiffs seeking punitive damages against a defendant (or defendants) for a single occurrence would have 350,000 reasons not to join their claims. And had that been the law here, the district court likely would have faced eight trials in a loop of repeat operative facts and players,” Judge Diaz wrote.

Photo: James Kolenich, left, attorney for Jason Kessler, speaks with the media after a jury gave a partial verdict in Sines v Kessler case Tuesday, Nov. 23, 2021, at the Federal Courthouse in Charlottesville, Va. A jury ordered white nationalist leaders and organizations to pay more than $25 million in damages Tuesday, Nov. 23, 2021, over violence that erupted during the deadly 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville. The lawsuit accused some of the country’s most well-known white nationalists of plotting the violence, including Jason Kessler. (Andrew Shurtleff/The Daily Progress via AP)

Topics
Virginia

Source link

Related Topics:caps on punitive damages charlottesville protest Featured white supremacists

Click to comment

Virginia

Virginia Democratic operative arrested on child pornography charges

Published

2 hours ago

December 20, 2025

Press Room

Virginia Democratic operative arrested on child pornography charges

WARNING: This story contains material some readers may find disturbing due to its graphic content. Reader discretion is advised.

RICHMOND, Va. — A Virginia Democratic operative is accused of distributing child pornography.

Randon Alexander Sprinkle, 30, allegedly engaged in conversations with an undercover FBI agent in May of this year through the Jack’d app under the name “Randy.”

The 9-page affidavit states that Sprinkle asked the agent to move their conversation to Telegram, where he allegedly wrote “mostly into young, rape, incest – you?”

The arrest has prompted swift condemnation from elected officals who worked with Sprinkle in various capacities.

Richmond City Council Vice President Katherine Jordan said Sprinkle served as her 2024 campaign treasurer, handling campaign forms, events and financial reporting.

“What has been alleged is disgusting and abhorrent,” Jordan said in a statement. “I’m shocked and sickened.”

1st District Council member Andrew Breton also used Sprinkle’s services for campaign finance reports and event logistics.

“The allegations are shocking and disturbing. I am grateful that law enforcement is involved, and that justice is taking its course,” Breton said.

Congresswoman Jennifer McClellan, who has appeared in several photos with Sprinkle that he posted on X, also responded through spokesman Jared Leopold.

“Congresswoman McClellan is shocked by these appalling accusations which should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” Leopold stated.

Sprinkle previously served as a leader in the Young Democrats of Virginia and held a financial director position with the Democratic Part of Virginia.

He has also been photographed with Governor-elect Abigail Spanberger. Spanberger’s representatives have not responded to requests for comment.

The FBI affidavit confirms that 68 files were extracted during a forensic sweep of Sprinkle’s electronic devices, some with disturbing titles. Legal expert Ed Riley said the investigation may have uncovered evidence of distribution through peer-to-peer networks where individuals exchange illegal video files and images.

If convicted on the single charge of distribution of child pornography, Sprinkle faces a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in federal prison, with potential sentencing up to 20 years.

“If they find the images and they can connect you to the images, you’re not dealing with the merits of the case anymore. You’re dealing with the resolution that it’s going to be,” Riley said.

Sprinkle is currently being held at the Northern Neck Regional Jail in Warsaw.

This is a developing story. Email the CBS 6 Newsroom if you have additional information to share.

📲: CONNECT WITH US

This story was initially reported by a journalist and has been converted to this platform with the assistance of AI. Our editorial team verifies all reporting on all platforms for fairness and accuracy. To learn more about how we use AI in our newsroom, click here.

Source link

Virginia

Penn State transfer opens the door for a James Franklin reunion at Virginia Tech

Published

15 hours ago

December 19, 2025

Press Room

Penn State transfer opens the door for a James Franklin reunion at Virginia Tech

Things are beginning to slow down for James Franklin since being hired at Virginia Tech in November. Sure, you can say that it never really slows down for a college football coach, but since signing his contract in Blacksburg, he has made major strides in recruiting, bringing the Hokies from near the bottom of the FBS to a Top 25 class with the Class of 2026.

Franklin has also been building his first staff at Virginia Tech. In both cases, recruiting and coaching additions, he has gone back to his Penn State roots to pluck both recruits and coaches. Heck, he is even reportedly bringing back former Virginia Tech head coach Brent Pry, who was fired in September to open the door for Franklin to come to Tech, as his defensive coordinator.

The transfer portal opens up next month, and there are going to be several needs that Franklin and his staff are going to have to address. There are going to be several portal targets, and one of them announced he was leaving Penn State and made it clear that he was thankful for Franklin for his time in State College. Is it a sign of things to come when he enters the portal?

Penn State transfer Chaz Coleman opens door for reunion with James Franklin

It was reported by Hayes Fawcett of Rivals and On3 that five-star Penn State edge Chaz Coleman was entering the transfer portal. Coleman quoted the post on X, formerly known as Twitter, and made it a point to thank Franklin and his staff for believing in him.

“After much thought and consideration, I have decided to enter the transfer portal this coming January to pursue other opportunities. I’d like thank James Franklin and his staff for believing in me and teaching me what it means to believe in myself,” Coleman wrote.

Coleman becomes one of the most coveted players when the portal opens, and the Warren, Ohio native will have no shortage of suitors. The 6-foot-4, 240-pound edge rusher played well as a freshman for the Nittany Lions with eight tackles in five games. Several of the top programs are going to be in on him. Don’t be surprised if Ohio State makes a major push for him.

As far as Virginia Tech goes, does Franklin get in the mix? That remains to be seen, but stranger things have happened. He would be a tremendous get for the Hokies, who need help along the defensive side of the ball along the line. Did he call out Franklin by coincidence, or is there an underlying message there? Most likely the first one, but we’ll see.

Source link

Virginia

Wachapreague Historic District named to Virginia Landmarks Register – Shore Daily News

Published

2 days ago

December 18, 2025

Press Room

Wachapreague Historic District named to Virginia Landmarks Register – Shore Daily News

Pictured: Wachapreague General Store. Photo credit- James Bell, 2021 Wachapreague General Store. Photo credit- James Bell, 2021

Virginia has added eight new sites to the Virginia Landmarks Register, recognizing places across the Commonwealth for their historic, architectural, and cultural significance, including a historic district on the Eastern Shore.

The Commonwealth’s Board of Historic Resources approved the designations during its quarterly public meeting on December 11 in Richmond. The Virginia Landmarks Register is the state’s official list of properties deemed important to Virginia’s history and heritage.

Among the newly designated sites is the Wachapreague Historic District. Encompassing 96 acres, the district includes the waterfront town of Wachapreague, which developed from the late 19th through the early 20th centuries as a destination for hunting and fishing and as a commercial hub with access to the Wachapreague Channel and the Atlantic Ocean.

The district features a concentration of residential and commercial buildings constructed in vernacular, Folk Victorian, and other architectural styles common to the Eastern Shore during the town’s period of growth. While Wachapreague’s population declined beginning in the 1960s, the town continues to attract visitors from across Virginia and beyond.

Other sites approved for listing include properties in Arlington, Bath, Frederick, Loudoun, and Pittsylvania counties; the city of Petersburg; and the town of Mount Jackson in Shenandoah County. Collectively, the new landmarks highlight a diverse range of resources, from a 20th-century airfield built for early commercial air travelers to a mill dam and mill pond complex that once served as a recreational and social center in Southwest Virginia.

The Virginia Department of Historic Resources will forward documentation for the newly listed sites to the National Park Service for consideration for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.

State and national register listings are honorary and do not place restrictions on private property owners. Instead, the designations are intended to encourage public understanding of Virginia’s historic places and provide property owners with the opportunity to pursue historic rehabilitation tax credits. Any tax credit projects must comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation.