In Campos v. Com., the Virginia Court of Appeals in an opinion by Judge Frank joined by Judge Clements and Senior Judge Willis held that the defendant's attempt to argue the "single larceny rule" would not be heard because it was not raised in the trial court, even though the Commonwealth's attorney in his argument against the motion to strike denied that the claims were "multiplicious."
Years ago, we were involved in some litigation in Virginia. Some other litigation was pending in D.C. Opposing counsel referred to our claims as "duplicitous." At the time, I thought they meant to say "duplicative," but maybe they didn't. Maybe they meant "duplicious."