Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 20-64 (2026)

Proceedings instituted by petition

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Proceedings under this chapter may be instituted upon petition, verified by oath or affirmation, filed by the spouse or child or by any probation officer or by any state or local law-enforcement officer or by the Department of Social Services upon information received, or by any other person having knowledge of the facts, and the petition shall set forth the facts and circumstances of the case.

1944, p. 211; Michie Suppl. 1946, § 1937; 1974, c. 464; 2002, c. 747.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1979–2008 · leading case: Com., Dept. of Soc. Servs. v. Johnson, 376 S.E.2d 787 (Va. Ct. App. 1989).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Com., Dept. of Soc. Servs. v. Johnson, 376 S.E.2d 787 (Va. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 6× “Code § 20-64 (now see Code § 20-49.2). 2 While Code § 20-64 authorized a mother to initiate proceedings to adjudicate paternity of the father and to obtain child support from the father pursuant to the provisions of § 20-61.”

Hylton Enter., Inc. v. Bd. of Supervisors, 258 S.E.2d 577 (Va. 1979). · cites it 2× “Under Section 20-64 of the Zoning Ordinance, Dale City may be developed to a maximum population density of eleven persons per acre, or approximately 57,000 people.”

Walthall v. Commonwealth, 353 S.E.2d 169 (Va. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “Code § 20-64 provides that they may be brought “upon petition, verified by oath or affirmation, filed by the spouse or child or by any probation officer or by any state or local law-enforcement officer or by any state or local public welfare officer upon information received, or…”

Rajan Jagannathan v. Valeria Shepeleva Jagannathan (Va. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 4× “” He argues, “Code § 20-64 requires that proceedings under Chapter 5 of Title 20 be instituted upon petition, verified under oath, and filed.”

Commonwealth v. Sweat, 41 Va. Cir. 104 (Spotsylvania Cir. Ct. 1996). · cites it 3× “Meanwhile, the Commonwealth’s Attorney determined that the arrest warrant contravened § 20-64 and § 20-70 and, as a consequence, might be void under Diggs v.”

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.