Va. Code » Title 10.1. Conservation » Subtitle II. Activities Administered by Other Entities » Chapter 14. Virginia Waste Management Act » Article 8. Penalties, Enforcement and Judicial Review
Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 10.1-1457 (2026)

Judicial review

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Except as provided in subsection B, any person aggrieved by a final decision of the Board or Director under this chapter shall be entitled to judicial review thereof in accordance with the Administrative Process Act (§ 2.2-4000 et seq.).

B. Any person who has participated, in person or by the submittal of written comments, in the public comment process related to a final decision of the Board or Director under § 10.1-1408.1 or § 10.1-1426 and who has exhausted all available administrative remedies for review of the Board's or Director's decision, shall be entitled to judicial review thereof in accordance with the Administrative Process Act (§ 2.2-4000 et seq.) if such person meets the standard for obtaining judicial review of a case or controversy pursuant to Article III of the United States Constitution. A person shall be deemed to meet such standard if (i) such person has suffered an actual or imminent injury which is an invasion of a legally protected interest and which is concrete and particularized; (ii) such injury is fairly traceable to the decision of the Board and not the result of the independent action of some third party not before the court; and (iii) such injury will likely be redressed by a favorable decision by the court.

1986, c. 492, § 10-312; 1988, c. 891; 1996, c. 1032.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1990–2008 · leading case: Concerned Taxpayers v. Dep't of Env't Quality, 525 S.E.2d 628 (Va. Ct. App. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Concerned Taxpayers v. Dep't of Env't Quality, 525 S.E.2d 628 (Va. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 12× “Standing Appellees challenge appellants’ standing to appeal under Code § 10.1-1457(B). Code § 10.1-1457(B) sets forth the requirements for judicial review under the Virginia Waste Management Act (Act).”
Philip Morris USA v. Chesaoeaje Bay, 643 S.E.2d 219 (Va. 2007). · cites it 4× “29, as well as Code § 10.1-1457, the judicial review provision of the Virginia Waste Management Act, to include nearly identical provisions allowing any person aggrieved of a decision of the respective permitting authority to seek judicial review.”
Chesapeake Bay Found., Inc. v. Commonwealth Ex Rel. State Water Control Bd., 616 S.E.2d 39 (Va. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 4× “Thus, this Court found that pursuant to Code § 10.1-1457(B) of the Virginia Waste Management Act, the appellant there had representational standing to sue the Department of Environmental Quality.”
Frederick Cnty. Bus. Park, LLC v. Virginia Dep't of Env't Quality, 660 S.E.2d 698 (Va. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “Code § 10.1-1457; 9 VAC 20-80-100. The complaining party bears the burden of proving that an error of law was committed.”
Residents Involved in Saving the Env't, Inc. v. Commonwealth, 471 S.E.2d 796 (Va. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “1(E). The Act provides that “[a]ny person aggrieved by a final decision of the Board or Director under this chapter shall be entitled to judicial review thereof in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act.”
Murray v. Green, 396 S.E.2d 653 (Va. 1990). · cites it 2× “1-613 (Soil and Water Conservation Board may sue for noncompliance with Dam Safety Act); Code § 10.”
James River Ass'n v. Commonwealth ex rel. Waste Mgmt. Bd., 63 Va. Cir. 602 (Richmond County Cir. Ct. 2004). · cites it 5× “The Commonwealth’s argument would be better directed at the merits of the appeal, not at the petition for appeal.”
Rockbridge Cnty. v. Burnley, 66 Va. Cir. 308 (Rockbridge Cir. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “Va. Code Ann. § 10.1-1457 (A) (2004). The requirements are that (1) aperson (2) must be aggrieved (3) by a final decision of the Director (4) under chapter 14 (The Virginia Waste Management Act).”
Rise v. Cw, Deq, Dwm (Va. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 12× “Standing DEQ argues that Residents Corporation and the church lack standing because (1) Code § 10.1-1457 does not explicitly provide for representative standing; (2) neither the church nor Residents Corporation has suffered an "actual or imminent - 12 - injury"; and (3) because…”
Residents Involved in Saving Env't, Inc. v. Commonwealth, 47 Va. Cir. 43 (Richmond County Cir. Ct. 1998). · cites it 11× “The first prong of Va. Code § 10.1-1457 mirrors the language at issue in Pearsall : A.”
Chesapeake Bay Found., Inc. v. Commonwealth ex rel. Virginia Water Control Bd., 65 Va. Cir. 440 (Richmond County Cir. Ct. 2004). · cites it 3× “This is true even though James River involved a decision of the Virginia Waste Management Board under Va. Code § 10.1-1457, while the present appeal involves a decision of the Virginia Water Control Board under Va.”
R.I.S.E. v. Commonwealth/D of Environ Qual (Va. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “The Act provides that "[a]ny person aggrieved by a final decision of the Board or Director under this chapter shall be entitled to judicial review thereof in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 10.1-1457(A) — 2 cases
Rise v. Cw, Deq, Dwm (Va. Ct. App. 2000). “Standing DEQ argues that Residents Corporation and the church lack standing because (1) Code § 10.1-1457 does not explicitly provide for representative standing; (2) neither the church nor Residents Corporation has suffered an "actual or imminent - 12 - injury"; and (3) because…”
Residents Involved in Saving Env't, Inc. v. Commonwealth, 47 Va. Cir. 43 (Richmond County Cir. Ct. 1998). “The first prong of Va. Code § 10.1-1457 mirrors the language at issue in Pearsall : A.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 10.1-1457(B) — 4 cases
Concerned Taxpayers v. Dep't of Env't Quality, 525 S.E.2d 628 (Va. Ct. App. 2000). “Standing Appellees challenge appellants’ standing to appeal under Code § 10.1-1457(B). Code § 10.1-1457(B) sets forth the requirements for judicial review under the Virginia Waste Management Act (Act).”
Chesapeake Bay Found., Inc. v. Commonwealth Ex Rel. State Water Control Bd., 616 S.E.2d 39 (Va. Ct. App. 2005). “Thus, this Court found that pursuant to Code § 10.1-1457(B) of the Virginia Waste Management Act, the appellant there had representational standing to sue the Department of Environmental Quality.”
Rise v. Cw, Deq, Dwm (Va. Ct. App. 2000). “Standing DEQ argues that Residents Corporation and the church lack standing because (1) Code § 10.1-1457 does not explicitly provide for representative standing; (2) neither the church nor Residents Corporation has suffered an "actual or imminent - 12 - injury"; and (3) because…”
Residents Involved in Saving Env't, Inc. v. Commonwealth, 47 Va. Cir. 43 (Richmond County Cir. Ct. 1998). “The first prong of Va. Code § 10.1-1457 mirrors the language at issue in Pearsall : A.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.