A. In the trial of any matter in any court in which the question of parentage arises, the court, upon its own motion or upon motion of either party, may and, in cases in which child support is in issue, shall direct and order that the alleged parents and the child submit to scientifically reliable genetic tests including blood tests. The motion of a party shall be accompanied by a sworn statement either (i) alleging paternity and setting forth facts establishing a reasonable possibility of the requisite sexual contact between the parties or (ii) denying paternity.
B. The court shall require the person requesting such genetic test, including a blood test, to pay the cost. However, if such person is indigent, the Commonwealth shall pay for the test. The court may, in its discretion, assess the costs of the test to the party or parties determined to be the parent or parents.
C. The results of a scientifically reliable genetic test, including a blood test, may be admitted in evidence when contained in a written report prepared and sworn to by a duly qualified expert, provided the written results are filed with the clerk of the court hearing the case at least fifteen days prior to the hearing or trial. Verified documentary evidence of the chain of custody of the blood specimens is competent evidence to establish the chain of custody. Any qualified expert performing such test outside the Commonwealth shall consent to service of process through the Secretary of the Commonwealth by filing with the clerk of the court the written results. Upon motion of any party in interest, the court may require the person making the analysis to appear as a witness and be subject to cross-examination, provided that the motion is made at least seven days prior to the hearing or trial. The court may require the person making the motion to pay into court the anticipated costs and fees of the witness or adequate security for such costs and fees.
1988, cc. 866, 878; 1989, c. 598; 1992, c. 516; 1997, cc. 792, 896.
Notes of Decisions
Virginia Emp. Comm'n v. Cmty. Alternatives, Inc., 705 S.E.2d 530 (Va. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “Code § 20-49.3 states the “documentary evidence of the chain of custody” essential for admission of genetic tests in parentage proceedings.”
Npa v. Wba, 380 S.E.2d 178 (Va. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “In the divorce proceeding the trial court ordered, pursuant to Code § 20-49.3, that the wife (NPA), the husband, and two children submit to the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) blood test to determine paternity.”
Eagan v. Ayd, 545 A.2d 55 (Md. 1988).
· cites it 2× “1987); Va.Code § 20-49.3 (Supp. 1988); Wash. Rev.”
Codynah v. Mullen, 60 Va. Cir. 446 (2003).
· cites it 4× “Nevertheless, she seeks an order for genetic testing under Virginia Code § 20-49.3(A), arguing that Mr. Mullen’s refusal to admit parentage of the child harms her reputation and that she “needs closure.”
Boardwine v. Bruce, 88 Va. Cir. 218 (Roanoke County Cir. Ct. 2014).
· cites it 3× “193:9-12, and a DNA test conducted pursuant to Va. Code § 20-49.3 affirms this. Ms. Bruce had approached Mr.”
Travis Lloyd Gifford, etc. v. David B. Dunkum (Va. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 4× “1-296; (4) the circuit court erred in ordering Dunkum to submit to a paternity test; and (5) the circuit court erred in finding Dunkum was the parent of Travis where the paternity blood tests obtained by Travis did not meet the requirements of Code § 20-49.3. In his separate…”
Travis Lloyd Gifford, etc. v. David B. Dunkum (Va. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 4× “1-296; (4) the circuit court erred in ordering Dunkum to submit to a paternity test; and (5) the circuit court erred in finding Dunkum was the parent of Travis where the paternity blood tests obtained by Travis did not meet the requirements of Code § 20-49.3. In his separate…”
David B. Dunkum v. Brenda Lee Gifford (Va. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 4× “1-296; (4) the circuit court erred in ordering Dunkum to submit to a paternity test; and (5) the circuit court erred in finding Dunkum was the parent of Travis where the paternity blood tests obtained by Travis did not meet the requirements of Code § 20-49.3. In his separate…”
Bryant v. Bryant, 17 Va. Cir. 293 (Chesterfield Cir. Ct. 1989).
· cites it 3× “Upon consideration of the evidence heard and argument presented, it is the ruling of the Court that the parties and the child submit to medically reliable genetic blood grouping tests pursuant to § 20-49.3 of the Virginia Code. Appellant shall pay the cost.”
In re Cooper-Loney, 56 Va. Cir. 67 (Richmond County Cir. Ct. 2001).
“In looking through the file, however, there does not appear to be a formal motion for such tests or a sworn statement denying paternity, both of which are required by § 20-49.3(A). Once such a motion and statement are filed, and assuming that the Department and/or Shateka Cooper…”
Commonwealth v. F. F., 16 Va. Cir. 14 (Wise Norton Cir. Ct. 1988).
“2 (now § 20-49.3) the Judge of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court ordered that the alleged parents and child submit to genetic blood grouping tests (referred *15 to as HLA blood tests) as evidence of the paternity of the child.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 20-49.3(A) — 3 cases
Codynah v. Mullen, 60 Va. Cir. 446 (2003).
“Nevertheless, she seeks an order for genetic testing under Virginia Code § 20-49.3(A), arguing that Mr. Mullen’s refusal to admit parentage of the child harms her reputation and that she “needs closure.”
In re Cooper-Loney, 56 Va. Cir. 67 (Richmond County Cir. Ct. 2001).
“In looking through the file, however, there does not appear to be a formal motion for such tests or a sworn statement denying paternity, both of which are required by § 20-49.3(A). Once such a motion and statement are filed, and assuming that the Department and/or Shateka Cooper…”
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.