For the City of Williamsburg and James City County, and every other county in the Commonwealth, and the Cities of Alexandria, Bristol, Buena Vista, Charlottesville, Chesapeake, Colonial Heights, Danville, Fredericksburg, Hampton, Hopewell, Lynchburg, Martinsville, Newport News, Norfolk, Petersburg, Portsmouth, Radford, Richmond, Roanoke, Salem, Staunton, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, Waynesboro and Winchester, there shall be a circuit court, which shall be called the circuit court of such county or city, or county and city, as the case may be. Each city circuit court shall be the sole court of record for the city and have jurisdiction over each suit, motion, prosecution or thing now or heretofore properly pending in the former courts of record of the city and over the records of such courts. Any reference in this Code or in any act of the General Assembly to a corporation, hustings, law and chancery, law and equity, chancery or other court of record of a city shall apply to the circuit court thereof, mutatis mutandis.
1973, c. 544, § 17-116.1; 1974, c. 297; 1981, c. 628; 1983, c. 580; 1991, c. 189; 1998, c. 872; 2006, c. 861.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 2000–2022 · leading case:
Porter v. Com., 661 S.E.2d 415 (Va. 2008).
Porter v. Com., 661 S.E.2d 415 (Va. 2008).
· cites it 4× “Code §§ 17.1-500; -506(4). Thus, the majority is left to observe that "[i]t is unclear from the circuit court's order whether it was transferring the place of trial with the Norfolk Circuit Court sitting in Arlington [County] or whether it was intended that the trial be…”
Croteau v. Croteau (In Re Croteau), 246 B.R. 254 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2000).
· cites it 2× “Va.Code Ann. § 17.1-500 and 17.1-513. Circuit courts are expressly designated as courts of record.”
Jill Ruderman v. Kathy Pritchard, 881 S.E.2d 665 (Va. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 2× “5 (defining “[c]ourts not of record”); Code § 17.1-500 (defining a “court of record of a city”).”
Austin v. Austin, 75 Va. Cir. 240 (Roanoke County Cir. Ct. 2008).
· cites it 3× “”) Where does that leave Teresa Austin’s prayer for relief in this case? To an extent the relief sought can be granted in a suit in which this court has subject-matter jurisdiction (Va. Code § 17.1-500) and personal jurisdiction over the parties, the court finds that, within the…”
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.