Virginia
How Cross v. State of Michigan applies in Virginia: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Contracts.
In Virginia, the principles from Cross v. State of Michigan emphasize the importance of sovereign immunity and the need for clear waivers when a state entity enters into a contract. Virginia upholds that government entities often enjoy immunity from suit unless specific statutory provisions allow for a waiver of this immunity.
In Virginia, state entities are immune from breach of contract claims unless the contract explicitly specifies a waiver of sovereign immunity or is covered under specific statutes.
The Court held that a party can sue the Commonwealth only if the statute granting the right to sue includes a waiver of immunity.
This case clarified that for a breach of contract claim against the state, there must be both a contractual agreement and a clear legislative intent to waive immunity.
Confirmed that the legislature must express an intention to waive sovereign immunity for a contract to be enforceable against the state.
While federal law similarly recognizes sovereign immunity, it has a more robust set of exceptions under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Virginia, however, requires explicit and narrow legislative waivers for claims against state entities, leading to potentially more restrictive outcomes for claimants.
This topic is relevant for the Virginia bar exam as it covers sovereign immunity principles, waiver of immunity, and contract enforcement against state entities, which are critical areas of state law.