Oct 1, 2020
This podcast is provided by Ben Glass and Steve Emmert
Granted Appeal Summary
MARBLE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL. v. STEVEN M. MALLON, ET AL. (Record Number 191131)
The Circuit Court of the City of Hampton; M. Gaten, Judge.
James J. Reid (David Kamp & Frank, L.L.C.) for appellants. Matthew D. Meadows (Jones, Blechman, Woltz & Kelly, P.C.) for appellees.
Assignment of Error The lower court erred in denying the Plea in Bar of Res Judicata filed by Defendants Sebastian Plucinski and Marble Technologies, Inc. (“Defendants”) because the Plaintiffs’ claims for relief are the same claims for relief between the same parties or their privies regarding the same conduct, transaction or occurrence that had been previously adjudicated on the merits in the matter styled, Mallon et al. v. Marble Technologies, Inc., et al., Case No. CL11-1684; reversed in Marble Techs., Inc. v. Mallon, 290 Va. 27, 773 S.E.2d 155 (2015). Assignment of Cross-Error The lower court erred when it certified the Petitioners’ Interlocutory Appeal of the Court’s denial of their Plea in Bar of Res Judicata filed by Sabastian Plucinksi and Marble Technologies, Inc. because the Petitioners did not agree that an Interlocutory Appeal is in the parties’ best interest as required by Virginia Code § 8.01-670.1.