Va. Code » Title 18.2. Crimes and Offenses Generally » Chapter 4. Crimes Against the Person » Article 9. Abortion
Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2 (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Repealed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Repealed by Acts 2003, cc. 961 and 963.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1998–2000 · leading case: Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 55 F. Supp. 2d 441 (E.D. Va. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 55 F. Supp. 2d 441 (E.D. Va. 1999). · cites it 41× “This action calls into question the constitutionality of the Virginia statute, Va.Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2 (the “Act”), which proscribes as criminal so-called “partial birth abortions,” interpreted by the Commonwealth to mean the abortion procedure known as intact dilation and…”
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 11 F. Supp. 2d 795 (E.D. Va. 1998). · cites it 14× “§§ 2201 and 2202, seeking a declaration that Chapters 448 and 579 of the 1998 Acts of the General Assembly, Va.Code § 18.2-74.2 (the “Act”), offend the Constitution of the United States in several ways.”
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 144 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 1998). · cites it 2× “” Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2 (emphasis added).”
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 224 F.3d 337 (4th Cir. 2000). “The judgment of the district court is reproduced here in full as follows: For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, the Court concludes, as a matter of law on the facts of the record, that Va.Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2 (the "Act”) violates the Due Process…”
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 183 F.3d 303 (4th Cir. 1998). “The facts of the case and text of the Partial Birth Abortion Act (the “Act”), Va. Code § 18.2-74.2, have been set forth in the memorandum opinion of the district court, Richmond Medical Center v.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2(A) — 3 cases
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 55 F. Supp. 2d 441 (E.D. Va. 1999). “This action calls into question the constitutionality of the Virginia statute, Va.Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2 (the “Act”), which proscribes as criminal so-called “partial birth abortions,” interpreted by the Commonwealth to mean the abortion procedure known as intact dilation and…”
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 11 F. Supp. 2d 795 (E.D. Va. 1998). “§§ 2201 and 2202, seeking a declaration that Chapters 448 and 579 of the 1998 Acts of the General Assembly, Va.Code § 18.2-74.2 (the “Act”), offend the Constitution of the United States in several ways.”
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 144 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 1998). “” Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2 (emphasis added).”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2(B) — 1 case
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 55 F. Supp. 2d 441 (E.D. Va. 1999). “This action calls into question the constitutionality of the Virginia statute, Va.Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2 (the “Act”), which proscribes as criminal so-called “partial birth abortions,” interpreted by the Commonwealth to mean the abortion procedure known as intact dilation and…”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2(D) — 2 cases
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 55 F. Supp. 2d 441 (E.D. Va. 1999). “This action calls into question the constitutionality of the Virginia statute, Va.Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2 (the “Act”), which proscribes as criminal so-called “partial birth abortions,” interpreted by the Commonwealth to mean the abortion procedure known as intact dilation and…”
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 11 F. Supp. 2d 795 (E.D. Va. 1998). “§§ 2201 and 2202, seeking a declaration that Chapters 448 and 579 of the 1998 Acts of the General Assembly, Va.Code § 18.2-74.2 (the “Act”), offend the Constitution of the United States in several ways.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-74.2(a) — 1 case
Richmond Med. Ctr. for Women v. Gilmore, 11 F. Supp. 2d 795 (E.D. Va. 1998). “§§ 2201 and 2202, seeking a declaration that Chapters 448 and 579 of the 1998 Acts of the General Assembly, Va.Code § 18.2-74.2 (the “Act”), offend the Constitution of the United States in several ways.”
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.