Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-416 (2026)

Punishment for using abusive language to another

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

If any person shall, in the presence or hearing of another, curse or abuse such other person, or use any violent abusive language to such person concerning himself or any of his relations, or otherwise use such language, under circumstances reasonably calculated to provoke a breach of the peace, he shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor.

Code 1950, § 18.1-255; 1960, c. 358; 1975, cc. 14, 15.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case: Hershfield v. Commonwealth, 417 S.E.2d 876 (Va. Ct. App. 1992).
Hershfield v. Commonwealth, 417 S.E.2d 876 (Va. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 52× “The jail sentence and $200 of the fine were suspended upon the condition that Hershfield keep the peace and be of good behavior for twelve months. On appeal, Hershfield contends that the evidence was insufficient to prove that he violated Code § 18.”
Marttila v. City of Lynchburg, 535 S.E.2d 693 (Va. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 22× “1 On appeal, appellant contends the court erroneously (1) convicted him of violating Code § 18.2-416 even though he was charged with violating a Lynchburg ordinance and the Commonwealth did not move to amend the charge; and (2) concluded the evidence was sufficient to prove his…”
Smith v. Commonwealth, 519 S.E.2d 831 (Va. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 12× “Code § 18.2-416 provides: If any person shall, in the presence or hearing of another, curse or abuse such person, or use any violent abusive language to such person concerning himself or any of his relations, or otherwise use such language, under circumstances reasonably…”
Timothy Lawrence Doscoli v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 786 S.E.2d 472 (Va. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “, under circumstances reasonably calculated to provoke a breach of the peace, he shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor.”
Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522 (1984). · cites it 2× “I Respondent Allen was arrested in January 1980 for allegedly using abusive and insulting language, a Class 3 misdemeanor under Va. Code § 18.2-416 (1982). The maximum penalty for a Class 3 misdemeanor is a $500 fine.”
Burgess v. City of Virginia Beach, 385 S.E.2d 59 (Va. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 8× “Last, we find also that there is sufficient evidence to support Burgess' conviction of using abusive language in violation of City Code § 23-12.”
Long v. Commonwealth, 375 S.E.2d 368 (Va. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 4× “2-57, and using abusive language, in violation of Code § 18.2-416. Because the petition for appeal was not filed with the Clerk of our Court in accordance with Rules 5A:3 and 5A:12, we dismiss.”
Hudson v. Lanier, 497 S.E.2d 471 (Va. 1998). · cites it 2× “Five days later, Christopher initiated another criminal complaint against Hudson for “curse and abuse,” in violation of Code § 18.2-416. An arrest warrant later was issued against Hudson on this charge.”
Battle v. Commonwealth, 647 S.E.2d 499 (Va. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “We agree with Battle that the subsection A conduct could not be, as the statute puts it, “deemed to include” his assault on Johnson because that action could be punishable under Code § 18.”
United States v. Jules Bartow, 997 F.3d 203 (4th Cir. 2021). “Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-416 . The Supreme Court of Virginia has limited the sweep of § 18.”
Wallace v. Chrysler Credit Corp., 743 F. Supp. 1228 (W.D. Va. 1990). “2-415 with § 18.2-416 (1988). The latter section states that If any person shall, in the presence or hearing of another, curse or abuse such other person, or use any violent abusive language to such person concerning himself or any of his relations, or otherwise use such…”
Ferguson v. Norfolk S. Corp., 704 F. Supp. 666 (W.D. Va. 1987). · cites it 3× “Ferguson alleges that Berry’s remarks were slanderous under Va.Code § 18.2-416. He asks for damages from NS and Berry to compensate for the suffering and mental distress that the statements caused him.”
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.