A. Nothing contained in this law shall deprive any other court of the concurrent jurisdiction to determine the custody of children upon a writ of habeas corpus under the law, or to determine the custody, guardianship, visitation or support of children when such custody, guardianship, visitation or support is incidental to the determination of causes pending in such courts, nor deprive a circuit court of jurisdiction to determine spousal support in a suit for separate maintenance. However, when a suit for divorce has been filed in a circuit court, in which the custody, guardianship, visitation or support of children of the parties or spousal support is raised by the pleadings and a hearing, including a pendente lite hearing, is set by the circuit court on any such issue for a date certain or placed on a motions docket within 21 days of the filing, though such hearing itself may occur after such 21-day period, the juvenile and domestic relations district courts shall be divested of the right to enter any further decrees or orders to determine custody, guardianship, visitation or support when raised for such hearing and such matters shall be determined by the circuit court unless both parties agreed to a referral to the juvenile court. In any case in which the jurisdiction of the juvenile and domestic relations district court has been divested pursuant to this section and no final support order has been entered, any award for child support or spousal support in the circuit court shall be retroactive to the date on which the proceeding was commenced by the filing of the action in the juvenile and domestic relations district court, provided that the petitioner exercised due diligence in the service of the respondent. Nothing in this section shall deprive a circuit court of the authority to refer any such case to a commissioner for a hearing or shall deprive the juvenile and domestic relations district courts of the jurisdiction to enforce its valid orders prior to the entry of a conflicting order of any circuit court for any period during which the order was in effect or to temporarily place a child in the custody of any person when that child has been adjudicated abused, neglected, in need of services or delinquent subsequent to the order of any circuit court.
B. Jurisdiction of cases involving violations of federal law by a child shall be concurrent and shall be assumed only if waived by the federal court or the United States attorney.
Code 1950, § 16.1-161; 1956, c. 555; 1977, c. 559; 1978, c. 740; 1984, cc. 657, 669; 1985, c. 183; 1987, c. 36; 1989, c. 509; 1990, c. 600; 2000, c. 781; 2003, c. 129; 2022, c. 527; 2023, c. 622.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
39
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1979–2024 · leading case:
Peple v. Peple, 364 S.E.2d 232 (Va. Ct. App. 1988).
Peple v. Peple, 364 S.E.2d 232 (Va. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 36× “On September 24, 1983, when the juvenile court entered the award of custody to Katherine, Code § 16.1-244(A) contained the following provision: [W]hen a circuit court shall have taken jurisdiction [to determine custody] by entry of an order relating to custody .”
Crabtree v. Crabtree, 435 S.E.2d 883 (Va. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 12× “The resolution of the question depends upon whether a "transfer" of "matters" under Code § 20-79(c) divests a court of record of its continuing jurisdiction as provided by Code § 20-108 to also address those issues "transferred to the juvenile and domestic relations district…”
Church v. Church, 483 S.E.2d 498 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 15× “Where the termination of residual parental rights and responsibilities is sought. In such cases jurisdiction shall be concurrent with and not exclusive of courts having equity jurisdiction, as provided in § 16.”
Fauquier Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Bethanee Ridgeway, 717 S.E.2d 811 (Va. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “Code § 16.1-244(A). The General Assembly contemplated that once a trial court terminated a person’s parental rights, the next step was to determine who would have custody of the child.”
Patricia Tackett v. Arlington Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs., 746 S.E.2d 509 (Va. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 2× “See also Code § 16.1-244 (Virginia circuit courts have jurisdiction to determine the custody or guardianship of a child when custody or guardianship is incidental to the determination of causes pending in such courts.”
Calfee v. Calfee, 509 S.E.2d 552 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 14× “However, "Mil such cases[,] jurisdiction shall be concurrent with and not exclusive of courts having equity jurisdiction, except as provided in [Code] § 16.1-244." Id. (emphasis added). Code § 16.”
Martin v. Bales, 371 S.E.2d 823 (Va. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 6× “Code § 16.1-244, in effect in June 1983 and March 1984, gave the district court concurrent jurisdiction with any court on matters of habeas corpus, guardianship, visitation or support, but “provided that when a circuit court shall have taken jurisdiction thereof by entry of an…”
Willis v. Gamez, 455 S.E.2d 274 (Va. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 5× “Even if we assume that a termination of residual parental rights involves the “custody, guardianship, visitation or support of children,” the record in this case does not establish that a cause was pending in the circuit court to which the father’s petition would be “incidental”…”
Rochelle v. Rochelle, 302 S.E.2d 59 (Va. 1983).
· cites it 5× “” Code § 16.1-244 provides in pertinent part: Nothing contained in this law shall deprive any other court of the concurrent jurisdiction to determine the custody of children upon a writ of habeas corpus under the law, or to determine the custody, guardianship, visitation or…”
Reid v. Reid, 480 S.E.2d 771 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 4× “2d 76, 77-78 (1972); see also Code §§ 16.1-244(A), 20-79(a); Martin v. Bales, 7 Va.”
Williams v. Williams, 501 S.E.2d 417 (Va. 1998).
· cites it 2× “In such cases jurisdiction shall be concurrent with and not exclusive of courts having equity jurisdiction, except as provided in § 16.1-244; .... "The authority of the juvenile court to adjudicate matters involving the custody, visitation, support, control or disposition of a…”
Lewis v. Culpeper Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 647 S.E.2d 511 (Va. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 7× “He argued that although Code § 16.1-244 provides the J & DR court and the circuit court with concurrent jurisdiction in certain matters, it did not cover termination proceedings and that, pursuant to the nonsuit statute and Code § 16.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 16.1-244(A) — 20 cases
Peple v. Peple, 364 S.E.2d 232 (Va. Ct. App. 1988).
“On September 24, 1983, when the juvenile court entered the award of custody to Katherine, Code § 16.1-244(A) contained the following provision: [W]hen a circuit court shall have taken jurisdiction [to determine custody] by entry of an order relating to custody .”
Fauquier Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Bethanee Ridgeway, 717 S.E.2d 811 (Va. Ct. App. 2011).
“Code § 16.1-244(A). The General Assembly contemplated that once a trial court terminated a person’s parental rights, the next step was to determine who would have custody of the child.”
Calfee v. Calfee, 509 S.E.2d 552 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
“However, "Mil such cases[,] jurisdiction shall be concurrent with and not exclusive of courts having equity jurisdiction, except as provided in [Code] § 16.1-244." Id. (emphasis added). Code § 16.”
Reid v. Reid, 480 S.E.2d 771 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
“2d 76, 77-78 (1972); see also Code §§ 16.1-244(A), 20-79(a); Martin v. Bales, 7 Va.”
Church v. Church, 483 S.E.2d 498 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
“Where the termination of residual parental rights and responsibilities is sought. In such cases jurisdiction shall be concurrent with and not exclusive of courts having equity jurisdiction, as provided in § 16.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 16.1-244(B) — 1 case
Church v. Church, 483 S.E.2d 498 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
“Where the termination of residual parental rights and responsibilities is sought. In such cases jurisdiction shall be concurrent with and not exclusive of courts having equity jurisdiction, as provided in § 16.”
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.