Va. Code » Title 54.1. Professions and Occupations » Subtitle IV. Professions Regulated by the Supreme Court » Chapter 39. Attorneys » Article 2. Bar Organization and Government
Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 54.1-3915 (2026)

Restrictions as to rules and regulations

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this article, the Supreme Court shall not promulgate rules or regulations prescribing a code of ethics governing the professional conduct of attorneys which are inconsistent with any statute; nor shall it promulgate any rule or regulation or method of procedure which eliminates the jurisdiction of the courts to deal with the discipline of attorneys. In no case shall an attorney who demands to be tried by a court of competent jurisdiction for the violation of any rule or regulation adopted under this article be tried in any other manner.

Code 1950, § 54-51; 1974, c. 536; 1988, c. 765.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2003–2023 · leading case: Fails v. Virginia State Bar, 574 S.E.2d 530 (Va. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fails v. Virginia State Bar, 574 S.E.2d 530 (Va. 2003). · cites it 16× “Disposition of the appeal involves the interaction between Part 6, § IV, ¶ 13(C)(6)(a)(i) of the Rules of Court (hereinafter, Rule 13(C)(6)) 1 and Code § 54.1-3915. Rule 13(C)(6) provides that a respondent in a proceeding before the Disciplinary Board shall be served with a…”
Cilman v. Virginia State Bar, 580 S.E.2d 830 (Va. 2003). · cites it 18× “The dispositive issue is whether an attorney subject to the sanctions permitted by Paragraph 13(M) is entitled, in accordance with the provisions of Code § 54.1-3915, to have that issue tried before a three-judge court upon making a timely demand for such a trial.”
In re Moseley, 643 S.E.2d 190 (Va. 2007). · cites it 3× “As the circuit court implied, this inherent and constitutional power is essentially acknowledged in Code § 54.1-3915, where even this Court is prohibited from promulgating "any rule or regulation or method of procedure which eliminates the jurisdiction of the courts to deal with…”
Green v. State Bar ex rel. Seventh Dist., 652 S.E.2d 118 (Va. 2007). · cites it 2× “Green's remanded appeal to the Board for reconsideration did not trigger any new right for Green to then request a three-judge court pursuant to Code § 54.1-3915 and Part 6, § IV, ¶ 13(I)(1)(a)(1)(a).”
Nickolas G. Spanos v. Shannon L. Taylor, 883 S.E.2d 720 (Va. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 26× “” Spanos asserted that the circuit court had jurisdiction under Code § 54.1-3915 to grant the relief he requested.”
Nickolas G. Spanos v. Michael Y. Feinmel, Esquire, No. 0140222 (Va. Ct. App. Mar. 7, 2023). · cites it 26× “” Spanos asserted that the circuit court had jurisdiction under Code § 54.1-3915 to grant the relief he requested.”
Grenadier v. McCabe, No. 3:22-cv-00016 (W.D. Va. Mar. 17, 2023). · cites it 23× “at 4 (alleging there is “jurisdiction for Virginia State Courts” pursuant to Va. Code § 54.1-3915); id. at 55 (alleging she has standing because “[a]ny person or entity globally can file a civil Ethics Complaint in Virginia courts against lawyers practicing law in Virginia,”…”
Spanos v. Vick, 576 F. Supp. 3d 361 (E.D. Va. 2021). · cites it 8× “Code § 54.1-3915. This section says that the Virginia Supreme Court may not adopt rules that diminish the power of Virginia’s circuit courts to discipline attorneys.”
Rhetta M. Daniel v. E. Grier Ferguson, No. 0685222 (Va. Ct. App. Mar. 14, 2023). · cites it 19× “” Daniel also contends that Judge Farris subsequently erred in holding that the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate this professional discipline case because pursuant to Code § 54.1-3915 and Part 6, § IV, Paragraph 13-2 of the Rules of the Supreme…”
Spanos v. Gibney, No. 3:22-cv-00503 (E.D. Va. Nov. 17, 2022). · cites it 6× “Va. Code Ann. § 54.1-3915 (West) (emphasis added).”
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.