<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Plaintiffs’ attorneys not giving up on Isbell</title>
	<link>http://www.valawyersweekly.com/vlwblog/2007/05/23/plaintiffs%e2%80%99-attorneys-not-giving-up-on-isbell/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 10:09:26 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.valawyersweekly.com/vlwblog/2007/05/23/plaintiffs%e2%80%99-attorneys-not-giving-up-on-isbell/#comment-20</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2007 18:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.valawyersweekly.com/vlwblog/2007/05/23/plaintiffs%e2%80%99-attorneys-not-giving-up-on-isbell/#comment-20</guid>
		<description>Separate from the request for rehearing, I believe that the next series of cases will be under 55-225.3. This is a stand alone statute without the arguable restrictions on remedies in the VRLTA.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;W. Andrew Harding, Esq.&lt;br/&gt;Harrisonburg</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Separate from the request for rehearing, I believe that the next series of cases will be under 55-225.3. This is a stand alone statute without the arguable restrictions on remedies in the VRLTA.</p>
<p>W. Andrew Harding, Esq.<br />Harrisonburg</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
