Va. Code » Title 16.1. Courts Not of Record » Chapter 6. Venue, Jurisdiction and Procedure in Civil Matters » Article 3. Procedure in Civil Cases
Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 16.1-114 (2026)

Repealed

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

Repealed by Acts 1983, c. 499.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1960–1997 · leading case: Hurst v. Ballard, 337 S.E.2d 284 (Va. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hurst v. Ballard, 337 S.E.2d 284 (Va. 1985). · cites it 24× “Moreover, the curative provisions of Code § 16.1-114 are not available to Hurst, as these provisions cannot be used to correct jurisdictional defects.”
Burks v. Three Hills Corp., 200 S.E.2d 521 (Va. 1973). · cites it 2× “204 (1934), we stated that the statutory predecessor to Code § 16.1-114 (Repl. Vol. 1960), which empowers the trial court to correct “a mere defect, irregularity or omission in the proceedings in the court not of record” imposed a duty upon the court to correct the omission of…”
Commonwealth ex rel. May v. Walker, 485 S.E.2d 134 (Va. 1997). · cites it 2× “2d 284, 285 (1985) (decided under former Code § 16.1-114); cf. Burks v. Three Hills Corp.”
Overnite Transp. Co. v. Barnett's, Inc., 217 Va. 222 (Va. 1976). · cites it 3× “Code § 16.1-114 affords the circuit court full power to control the course of appeals.”
Gertler v. Bowling, 116 S.E.2d 268 (Va. 1960). “The trial court, sitting without a jury, held that the evidence showed the plaintiff’s automobile became a total loss while in the possession of the defendants as bailees and, acting under § 16.1-114, Code of 1950, as amended, Acts of 1956, ch.”
Grinels v. Legg, 155 S.E.2d 56 (Va. 1967). · cites it 2× “Code § 16.1-114 deals with principles applicable in trials of cases appealed from courts not of record to courts of record.”
G & G Roofing Co. v. Harris, 5 Va. Cir. 332 (Clarke Cir. Ct. 1986). · cites it 2× “Code Section 16.1-114 by its own terms is to be liberally construed and gives ”the circuit court full power to control the course of appeals" of cases from the General District Court, and allows the Circuit Court to require a defendant in such case "to file responsive pleadings…”
Snead v. Shaw, 13 Va. Cir. 75 (1987). · cites it 6× “The Supreme Court did not agree and further rejected appellant’s argument that the curative provisions of Section 16.1-114 (now 16.1-114.1) could be used to correct such a jurisdictional defect.”
Com., Va. Dept. of Soc. Serv. v. Walker, 485 S.E.2d 134 (Va. 1997). · cites it 2× “2d 284, 285 (1985) (decided under former Code § 16.1-114); cf. Burks v. Three Hills Corp.”
Lake Holiday Country Club, Inc. v. Morton, 6 Va. Cir. 21 (Winchester Cir. Ct. 1982). · cites it 4× “In a pre-trial conference he contended that he is entitled to a trial "de novo” on all issues, relying primarily upon Virginia Code § 16.1-114. On the other hand, the defendant contends that since this appeal is from the denial of a new trial under the provisions of Virginia…”
Kegley v. Sullins, 13 Va. Cir. 170 (1988). · cites it 4× “" Indeed, the curative effects of this Code Section (former § 16.1-114) were applied to a deficient appeal bond in the case of Burks v.”
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.