Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 63.2-1729 (2026)

Confidentiality of complainant's identity

✓ 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

Whenever the Department conducts inspections and investigations in response to complaints received from the public, the identity of the complainant and the identity of any resident, participant or child who is the subject of the complaint, or identified therein, shall be confidential and shall not be open to inspection by members of the public. Identities of the complainant and resident, participant or child who is the subject of the complaint shall be revealed only if a court order so requires. Nothing contained herein shall prevent the Department, in its discretion, from disclosing to the assisted living facility, adult day center or child welfare agency the nature of the complaint or the identity of the resident, participant or child who is the subject of the complaint. Nothing contained herein shall prevent the Department or its employees from making reports under Chapter 15 (§ 63.2-1500 et seq.) of this title or Article 2 (§ 63.2-1603 et seq.) of Chapter 16 of this title. If the Department intends to rely, in whole or in part, on any statements made by the complainant, at any administrative hearing brought against the assisted living facility, adult day center or child welfare agency, the Department shall disclose the identity of the complainant to the assisted living facility, adult day center or child welfare agency a reasonable time in advance of such hearing.

1994, c. 941, § 63.1-177.2; 2002, c. 747; 2024, cc. 37, 150.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2025–2025 · leading case: Lipscomb v. Slonaker, No. 7:24-cv-00250 (W.D. Va. Mar. 20, 2025).
Lipscomb v. Slonaker, No. 7:24-cv-00250 (W.D. Va. Mar. 20, 2025). · cites it 5× “Va. Code § 63.2-1729. Unauthorized disclosure of confidential social service records is punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor.”
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.