Skip to main content

Taylor v. Commonwealth

Citations

  • 604 S.E.2d 103
  • 44 Va. App. 179
  • 2004 Va. App. LEXIS 512

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “The general rule is that statutes are prospective in the absence of an express provision by the legislature.” (citation omitted)
  • “The general rule is that statutes are prospective in the absence of an express provision by the legislature.” (citation omitted)
  • “ ‘[T]he rights of the parties are to be deemed in accordance with the law in effect when the action is begun.’ ” (quoting Washington v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 185, 193, 217 S.E.2d 815, 823 (1975))
  • “[E]ven if the language of an amended statute does not provide that the amendments should be given retroactive effect, the statute may still be retroactively applied under…Code § 1-16,” which is the predecessor to current § 1-239

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Robert J. Humphreys

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.