Summary
The Supreme Court of Virginia held that mailing a notice of claim by certified mail, return receipt requested, is the exclusive method of filing a notice of claim under the Virginia Tort Claims Act. Because the claimant's certified mailing was received more than one year after her injury, her hand-delivery of the notice within the statutory period did not satisfy the Act's filing requirement. The court affirmed dismissal of the action based on sovereign immunity.
Holdings
- Certified mailing through the United States Postal Service, return receipt requested, addressed to the Director of the Division of Risk Management or the Attorney General, is the exclusive method of filing a notice of claim under the Virginia Tort Claims Act.
- Neither timely hand-delivery nor the Commonwealth's actual knowledge of the claim satisfies the Act's notice requirement when the certified-mail notice is not received within the statutory period.
Questions Presented
- Whether certified mailing, return receipt requested, is the exclusive method for filing a notice of claim against the Commonwealth under Code § 8.01-195.6.
- Whether timely hand-delivery or actual knowledge of the claim can satisfy the Virginia Tort Claims Act notice requirement when certified-mail receipt occurs after the statutory one-year period.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (4)
- Baumgardner v. Southwestern Va. Mental Health Inst., 247 Va. 486, 442 S.E.2d 400 (1994)(followed)
- Halberstam v. Commonwealth, 251 Va. 248, 467 S.E.2d 783 (1996)(followed)
- Commonwealth v. Zamani, 256 Va. 391, 507 S.E.2d 608 (1998)(followed)
- Town of Crewe v. Mario, 228 Va. 109, 319 S.E.2d 748 (1984)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…