As used in this chapter:
"Joint custody" means (i) joint legal custody where both parents retain joint responsibility for the care and control of the child and joint authority to make decisions concerning the child even though the child's primary residence may be with only one parent, (ii) joint physical custody where both parents share physical and custodial care of the child, or (iii) any combination of joint legal and joint physical custody which the court deems to be in the best interest of the child.
"Person with a legitimate interest" shall be broadly construed and includes, but is not limited to, grandparents, step-grandparents, stepparents, former stepparents, blood relatives and family members provided any such party has intervened in the suit or is otherwise properly before the court. The term shall be broadly construed to accommodate the best interest of the child. A party with a legitimate interest shall not include any person (i) whose parental rights have been terminated by court order, either voluntarily or involuntarily, except for purposes of this title, as otherwise provided by this definition; (ii) whose interest in the child derives from or through a person whose parental rights have been terminated, either voluntarily or involuntarily, or whose interest in the child derives from or through a person pursuant to clause (iii), including but not limited to grandparents, stepparents, former stepparents, blood relatives and family members, if the child subsequently has been legally adopted, except where a final order of adoption is entered pursuant to § 63.2-1241; or (iii) who has been convicted of a violation of subsection A of § 18.2-61, § 18.2-63, subsection B of § 18.2-366, or an equivalent offense of another state, the United States, or any foreign jurisdiction, or who has been found by clear and convincing evidence to have engaged in the conduct prohibited by subsection A of § 18.2-61, § 18.2-63, or subsection B of § 18.2-366, whether or not the person has been charged with or convicted of the alleged violation, when the child who is the subject of the petition was conceived as a result of such violation or conduct. For purposes of this title, a "person with a legitimate interest" shall also include a parent whose rights previously had been terminated, provided that the child whose custody or visitation is at issue (a) is at least 14 years of age; (b) has had a permanency goal previously achieved by adoption; (c) has had his adoptive parents die or, pursuant to § 16.1-277.02, each of such child's adoptive parents has permanently been relieved of custody of such child and each adoptive parent has had his parental rights terminated; and (d) is in the custody of a local board of social services, and provided that the parent whose rights had previously been terminated has (1) complied with the terms of any written post-adoption contact and communication agreement entered into pursuant to Article 1.1 (§ 63.2-1220.2 et seq.) of Chapter 12 of Title 63.2 and (2) maintained a positive, continuous relationship with the child since termination.
"Sole custody" means that one person retains responsibility for the care and control of a child and has primary authority to make decisions concerning the child.
1994, c. 769; 1997, c. 690; 1999, c. 1028; 2000, c. 830; 2003, c. 229; 2005, c. 890; 2014, c. 653; 2025, cc. 143, 547.
Notes of Decisions
Philip Surles v. Kristan Mayer & Marty Cullen, Jr., 628 S.E.2d 563 (Va. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 32× “On appeal, Surles argues that the trial court erred in determining that he lacked standing to pursue visitation •with James because he is not a “person with a legitimate interest” within the meaning of Code § 20-124.1, even though he resided intermittently with James, Kayla, and…”
Damon v. York, 680 S.E.2d 354 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 34× “After conducting an evidentiary hearing, the circuit court held the appellant was not a “person with a legitimate interest” under Code § 20-124.1 for purposes of obtaining court-ordered visitation.”
Williams v. Williams, 501 S.E.2d 417 (Va. 1998).
· cites it 32× “" Code § 20-124.1 provides that the term "person with a legitimate interest" is to be "broadly construed and includes, but is not limited to grandparents, stepparents, former stepparents, blood relatives and family members.”
Stadter v. Siperko, 661 S.E.2d 494 (Va. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 16× “On appeal, appellant contends the trial court erred in refusing to hold that appellant was a de facto parent and in failing to apply a "best interests of the child" standard to determine whether she was entitled to visitation.”
Brown v. Brown, 518 S.E.2d 336 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 8× “" Code § 20-124.1. Joint custody has several meanings.”
Lynchburg Div. of Soc. Servs. v. Cook, 666 S.E.2d 361 (Va. 2008).
· cites it 6× “As a result of the Court of Appeals' opinion, the LDSS argues any "person with a legitimate interest" under Code § 20-124.1 entitled to file a petition for custody of a child subject to a foster care plan could effectively circumvent the foster care statutes by simply filing a…”
Denise Hawkins v. Darla Grese, 809 S.E.2d 441 (Va. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 8× “” Code § 20-124.1. If such “person[s] with a legitimate interest” are in contention with parents for custody they cannot simultaneously also be parents.”
Yopp v. Hodges, 598 S.E.2d 760 (Va. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 4× “See Code § 20-124.1. The party seeking visitation bears the burden of proving it is in the best interests of the child.”
Bottoms v. Bottoms, 457 S.E.2d 102 (Va. 1995).
· cites it 4× “Some of the foregoing principles have been codified recently by the General Assembly in Code §§ 20-124.1 to -124.6. Act 1994, ch.”
Griffin v. Griffin, 581 S.E.2d 899 (Va. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 2× “Given our holding, we need not address whether husband qualifies as a "[p]erson with a legitimate interest” under Code § 20-124.1. Cf. Kogon v. Ulerick, 12 Va.”
Brown v. Burch, 519 S.E.2d 403 (Va. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 4× “See Code § 20-124.1. *685 “[T]he wishes of a child who has reached the age of discretion, though not controlling, should be considered [by the trial court] and given appropriate weight.”
Ryan Bedell v. Christina Price & Walter Ryan Matzuk, 828 S.E.2d 263 (Va. Ct. App. 2019).
“To the circuit court, they were all parents, and therefore, none was or could be considered to be a “[p]erson with a legitimate interest” as defined by Code § 20-124.1. Accordingly, we remand the matter to the circuit court to conduct an inquiry regarding possible third-party…”
— Va. Code Ann. § 20-124.1(B) — 1 case
— Va. Code Ann. § 20-124.1(ii) — 1 case
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.