Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 65.2-100 (2026)

Short title

✓ current as of May 2026

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

This title shall be known as the Virginia Workers' Compensation Act.

Code 1950, § 65-1; 1968, c. 660, § 65.1-1; 1983, c. 239; 1991, c. 355.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 105 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1991–2024 · leading case: Peck v. Safway Steel Prods., Inc., 551 S.E.2d 328 (Va. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Peck v. Safway Steel Prods., Inc., 551 S.E.2d 328 (Va. 2001). · cites it 8× “2-307, the exclusivity provision of the Virginia Workers' Compensation Act, Code § 65.2-100 et seq. (the Act). I Lisa C.”

Tomlin v. Vance Int'l, Inc., 470 S.E.2d 599 (Va. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 8× “lement shall be binding upon the Claimant, the employer and/or its insurer and is intended to be a full and final settlement of any claims, demands and obhgations, between the Claimant and/or the employer, or its insurance carrier which might be asserted by the Claimant and/or…”

Mizenko v. Elec. Motor & Contracting Co., 419 S.E.2d 637 (Va. 1992). · cites it 8× “(now Code § 65.2-100 et seq. ) (Virginia Act), from asserting a negligence action under the general maritime law against a prime contractor, as well as a subcontractor who was not his employer.”

McKellar v. Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc., 777 S.E.2d 857 (Va. 2015). · cites it 4× “We have long held that the fundamental purpose of the Virginia Worker’s Compensation Act, Code § 65.2-100, et seq., is to compensate employees for accidental injuries arising in the workplace.”

Quisenberry v. Huntington Ingalls Inc., 818 S.E.2d 805 (Va. 2018). · cites it 2× “Today a majority of the Court: (1) eviscerates the well-established tort concept of particularized duty; (2) conflates duty and proximate cause by relying on foreseeability to determine whether a duty exists; (3) undermines the Workers' Compensation Act, Code § 65.2-100, et seq…”

Hilton v. Martin, 654 S.E.2d 572 (Va. 2008). · cites it 2× “The sole question on appeal is whether the trial court erred in dismissing the plaintiff's case on the ground that it involved an "injury arising out of" her employment and therefore that the Virginia Worker's Compensation Act, Code §§ 65.2-100 et seq. (the Act), provided the…”

Middlekauff v. Allstate Ins., 439 S.E.2d 394 (Va. 1994). · cites it 4× “2-307) of the Virginia Workers' Compensation Act (the Act), Code §§ 65.2-100 to -1310, from bringing an action at law based on this injury.”

Simms v. Ruby Tuesday, Inc., 704 S.E.2d 359 (Va. 2011). · cites it 2× “Background This case arises from a claim filed by Matthew Edward Simms (Simms) with the Virginia Workers' Compensation Commission (the Commission), in which he sought coverage under the Workers' Compensation Act, Code § 65.2-100 et seq. (the Act), for an injury that occurred…”

Ford Motor Co. v. Favinger, 654 S.E.2d 575 (Va. 2008). · cites it 2× “Favinger suffered an injury compensable under the Virginia Workers' Compensation Act (the Act), Code §§ 65.2-100 through 65.2-1310. Favinger received compensation benefits for various periods and was eventually released to return to light duty work on May 12, 2003.”

United Airlines, Inc. v. Hayes, 708 S.E.2d 418 (Va. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “Hayes (claimant), a former employee, is entitled to ongoing benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act (the Act), Code §§ 65.2-100 to -1310. On appeal, employer contends the commission erroneously found claimant did not materially aggravate his compensable traumatic brain…”

Jones v. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Von Moll, 814 S.E.2d 192 (Va. 2018). · cites it 2× “2-402(C), which is contained in the Workers' Compensation Act, Code § 65.2-100, et seq ., it is presumed that, subject to certain conditions, throat cancer that develops in a firefighter is "an occupational disease, suffered in the line of duty.”

Fijalkowski v. Wheeler, 361 F. Supp. 3d 577 (E.D. Va. 2019). · cites it 3× “These facts further weaken plaintiff's argument that the police defendants' delay in removing plaintiff from the water, alone, is sufficient to demonstrate that the police defendant were indifferent to plaintiff's safety because there were ample reasons to believe, at least for…”

Show all 105 citing cases →

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.