The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Fuste v. Riverside Healthcare Assoc.
No. 020628Supreme Court of Virginia
020628 Fuste v. Riverside Healthcare Assoc. 01/10/2003 In a defamation action brought by two physicians, certain of the alleged statements contain provably false factual connotations while other alleged statem…
Clerk language is kept verbatim. Vote Files does not infer who is winning.The movement
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The proof
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
020628 Fuste v. Riverside Healthcare Assoc. 01/10/2003 In a defamation action brought by two physicians, certain of the alleged s…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First seen
- Oct 4, 2026
- Last entry
- Jan 10, 2003
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Official docket
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
Docket entry
020628 Fuste v. Riverside Healthcare Assoc. 01/10/2003 In a defamation action brought by two physicians, certain of the alleged statements contain provably false factual connotations while other alleged statements are dependent upon the speaker's viewpoint. Thus, the judgment of the circuit court sustaining a demurrer is reversed in part and affirmed in part. The case is remanded.
Open court document ↗Documents and links