Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-499 (2026)

Combinations to injure others in their reputation, trade, business or profession; rights of employees

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Any two or more persons who combine, associate, agree, mutually undertake or concert together for the purpose of (i) willfully and maliciously injuring another in his reputation, trade, business or profession by any means whatever or (ii) willfully and maliciously compelling another to do or perform any act against his will, or preventing or hindering another from doing or performing any lawful act, shall be jointly and severally guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Such punishment shall be in addition to any civil relief recoverable under § 18.2-500.

B. Any person who attempts to procure the participation, cooperation, agreement or other assistance of any one or more persons to enter into any combination, association, agreement, mutual understanding or concert prohibited in subsection A of this section shall be guilty of a violation of this section and subject to the same penalties set out in subsection A.

C. This section shall not affect the right of employees lawfully to organize and bargain concerning wages and conditions of employment, and take other steps to protect their rights as provided under state and federal laws.

Code 1950, § 18.1-74.1:1; 1964, c. 623; 1972, c. 469; 1975, cc. 14, 15; 1994, c. 534.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 380 cases (71 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case: Simmons v. Miller, 544 S.E.2d 666 (Va. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Simmons v. Miller, 544 S.E.2d 666 (Va. 2001). · cites it 22× “We also consider the trial court’s ruling that there was insufficient evidence to sustain a claim of statutory conspiracy pursuant to Code §§ 18.2-499 and -500 and its ruling that there was insufficient evidence of proximate causation between the harm to the corporation and…”

Andrews v. Ring, 585 S.E.2d 780 (Va. 2003). · cites it 20× “On September 4, 2001, Andrews and Cox filed separate motions for judgment in the Circuit Court of Grayson County against Ring and Bolt alleging malicious prosecution and conspiracy to injure reputation, trade, business, and profession pursuant to Code §§ 18.2-499 and 18.2-500.…”

Advanced Marine Enter., Inc. v. PRC Inc., 501 S.E.2d 148 (Va. 1998). · cites it 26× “The five Counts relevant to this appeal are: 1) breach of fiduciary duty (Count I); 2) intentional interference with contractual relations (Count II); 3) intentional interference with prospective business and contractual relations (Count ID); 4) specific performance and breach…”

Williams v. Dominion Tech. Partners, L.L.C., 576 S.E.2d 752 (Va. 2003). · cites it 8× “This appeal arises from a judgment in favor of an employer against a former at-will employee on a motion for judgment seeking damages for an alleged breach of a fiduciary duty, tortious interference with a business relationship, and business conspiracy in violation of Code §§…”

Francis Hosp., Inc. v. Read Props., LLC, 820 S.E.2d 607 (Va. 2018). · cites it 17× “("Delta") asserting claims for breach of contract, intentional interference with contract, and statutory business conspiracy under Code §§ 18.2-499 and -500. The circuit court found in favor of Read Properties on all claims and entered judgment against Francis Hospitality and…”

Greenspan v. Osheroff, 351 S.E.2d 28 (Va. 1986). · cites it 22× “The dispositive question in this appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s finding of a violation of Code §§ 18.2-499 with imposition of damages pursuant to 18.”

Warner v. Buck Creek Nursery, Inc., 149 F. Supp. 2d 246 (W.D. Va. 2001). · cites it 18× “” Under the Virginia Code, [a]ny two or more persons who combine, associate, agree, mutually undertake or concert together for the purpose of (i) willfully and maliciously injuring another in his reputation, trade, business or profession by any means whatever .”

Storey v. Patient First Corp., 207 F. Supp. 2d 431 (E.D. Va. 2002). · cites it 17× “§ 3730 (h); Count II — breach of contract; Count III — tortious interference with business relationship; Count IV— wrongful discharge in violation of the public policy and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia; Count V — breach of fiduciary duty; 9 Count VI — trespass and…”

Schlegel v. Bank of Am., N.A., 505 F. Supp. 2d 321 (W.D. Va. 2007). · cites it 15× “See Va.Code Ann. § 18.2-499 (West 2007). Defendant timely removed and filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”

Paul Bus. Sys., Inc. v. Canon U.S.A., Inc., 397 S.E.2d 804 (Va. 1990). · cites it 12× “" Under the conspiracy count, the plaintiff alleged that the conduct of defendants constituted a violation of Code § 18.2-499 (misdemeanor to combine to injure others in their reputation, trade, business, or profession).”

Saks Fifth Avenue, Inc. v. James, Ltd., 630 S.E.2d 304 (Va. 2006). · cites it 12× “, Thompson's former employer, for breach of fiduciary duty and violation of Code §§ 18.2-499 and -500 (prohibiting conspiracy to injure another's business).”

Fox v. Deese, 362 S.E.2d 699 (Va. 1987). · cites it 8× “Count V This count is a claim against Mathias, Deese, and Johnson for violating Code §§ 18.2-499 and -500. Fox claims that these defendants, based upon the previously alleged facts, “combined, associated, agreed, mutually undertook and/or concerted together for the purpose of…”

Show all 380 citing cases →

— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-499(A) — 26 cases

Suntrust Bank v. Roberson ( in Re Baseline Sports, Inc.), 393 B.R. 105 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2008).

Hudgins v. Shah (In Re Sys. Eng'g & Energy Mgmt. Assocs., Inc.), 252 B.R. 635 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2000).

Gelber v. Glock, 800 S.E.2d 800 (Va. 2017).

Francis Hosp., Inc. v. Read Props., LLC, 820 S.E.2d 607 (Va. 2018). “("Delta") asserting claims for breach of contract, intentional interference with contract, and statutory business conspiracy under Code §§ 18.2-499 and -500. The circuit court found in favor of Read Properties on all claims and entered judgment against Francis Hospitality and…”

Syed v. Zh Tech., Inc., 694 S.E.2d 625 (Va. 2010).

— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-499(A)(i) — 1 case

Marcantonio v. Dudzinski, 155 F. Supp. 3d 619 (W.D. Va. 2015).

— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-499(A)(ii) — 1 case

Cipollone v. Applestein (E.D.N.Y 2023).

— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-499(B) — 8 cases

Darton Envtl., Inc. v. Fjuvo Collections, LLC, 332 F. Supp. 3d 1022 (W.D. Va. 2018).

Jones v. Baugher, 689 F. Supp. 2d 825 (W.D. Va. 2010).

Waytec Elec. Corp. v. Rohm & Haas Elec. Materials, LLC, 459 F. Supp. 2d 480 (W.D. Va. 2006).

Suntrust Bank v. Roberson ( in Re Baseline Sports, Inc.), 393 B.R. 105 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2008).

Schur v. Sprenkle, 84 Va. Cir. 418 (Richmond County Cir. Ct. 2012).

— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-499(a) — 15 cases

Tazewell Oil Co. v. United Virginia Bank/Crestar Bank, 413 S.E.2d 611 (Va. 1992).

Greenspan v. Osheroff, 351 S.E.2d 28 (Va. 1986). “The dispositive question in this appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s finding of a violation of Code §§ 18.2-499 with imposition of damages pursuant to 18.”

Charles E. Brauer Co. v. NationsBank of Virginia, 466 S.E.2d 382 (Va. 1996).

Petra Int'l Banking Corp. v. First Am. Bank, 758 F. Supp. 1120 (E.D. Va. 1991).

Selman v. Am. Sports Underwriters, Inc., 697 F. Supp. 225 (W.D. Va. 1988).

— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-499(b) — 2 cases

Oyster v. Mercer, 25 Va. Cir. 440 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 1991).

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.