Va. Code » Title 8.01. Civil Remedies and Procedure » Chapter 2. Parties » Article 2. Special Provisions
Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-13 (2026)

Assignee or beneficial owner may sue in own name; certain discounts allowed

✓ 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

The assignee or beneficial owner of any bond, note, writing or other chose in action, not negotiable may maintain thereon in his own name any action which the original obligee, payee, or contracting party might have brought, but, except as provided in § 8.9A-403, shall allow all just discounts, not only against himself, but against such obligee, payee, or contracting party, before the defendant had notice of the assignment or transfer by such obligee, payee, or contracting party, and shall also allow all such discounts against any intermediate assignor or transferor, the right to which was acquired on the faith of the assignment or transfer to him and before the defendant had notice of the assignment or transfer by such assignor or transferor to another.

Code 1950, § 8-94; 1964, c. 219; 1966, c. 396; 1977, c. 617.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2024 · leading case: Johnson v. Hart, 692 S.E.2d 239 (Va. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Johnson v. Hart, 692 S.E.2d 239 (Va. 2010). · cites it 26× “" *242 Johnson argued that Code § 8.01-13 permitted her, as a beneficial owner of the Estate, to bring suit in her individual capacity.”
Thorsen v. Richmond Soc'y for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 786 S.E.2d 453 (Va. 2016). · cites it 12× “Yet Johnson applies specifically to an attempt to bring suit under Code § 8.01-13, pertaining to assigns and beneficial owners.”
Kelly Health Care, Inc. v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 309 S.E.2d 305 (Va. 1983). · cites it 8× “Code § 8.01-13. But this statute "has no application to cases in which there is no assignment.”
Erie Ins. Co. v. McKinley Chiropractic Ctr. (ORDER), 803 S.E.2d 741 (Va. 2017). · cites it 4× “*742 Code § 8.01-13 provides that "[t]he assignee or beneficial owner of any bond, note, writing or other chose in action, not negotiable may maintain thereon in his own name any action which the original obligee, payee, or contracting party might have brought.”
Lataif v. Com. Indus. Constr., Inc., 286 S.E.2d 159 (Va. 1982). · cites it 2× “Preliminarily, we examine the relevant portions of the law of assignments. “The assignee .”
Sunsport, Inc. v. Barclay Leisure Ltd., 984 F. Supp. 418 (E.D. Va. 1997). · cites it 4× “Sunsport even concedes that, but claims that under Va.Code § 8.01-13, it can sue in its own name as an assignee.”
Apac-Virginia, Inc. v. Virginia Dep't of Highways & Transp., 388 S.E.2d 841 (Va. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “”); Code § 8.2-318 (“Lack of privity between plaintiff and defendant shall be no defense in any action against the manufacturer or seller of goods to recover damages for breach of warranty.”
Burton v. Dolph, 89 Va. Cir. 101 (Norfolk Cir. Ct. 2014). · cites it 2× “The plaintiff in that case did not attempt to argue that she *118 had standing to lodge her claims as a third-party beneficiary; rather, she maintained that, because a beneficiary under a will is the beneficial owner of the assets of an estate, Virginia Code § 8.01-13 permits…”
Beckner v. Twin City Fire Ins., 58 Va. Cir. 544 (Va. Cir. Ct. 2002). “The plaintiff contends that the personal representative is the appropriate party and that the Court complied with those statutory provisions.”
Faison v. Hughson, 80 Va. Cir. 96 (Roanoke County Cir. Ct. 2010). · cites it 3× “This is an action by an alleged assignee to enforce her right to recover the repayment of a loan, and, thus, the plaintiff, being the assignee, has standing to bring this suit under Va. Code § 8.01-13. “The assignee or beneficial owner of any bond, note, writing, or other chose…”
Mazie Green v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 909 S.E.2d 594 (Va. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “turned on its claim that it was the assignee of the debt and that Green was a party to the contract by which the debt arose.”). - 53 - approach; third, dicta in two 2022 Supreme Court opinions is supportive of this approach.”
Fac. for Responsible Change v. Visitors of James Madison Univ., 38 Va. Cir. 159 (Rockingham Cir. Ct. 1995). · cites it 2× “As parties to contracts with the Corporation and as concerned members of the JMU community, FRC’s members potentially have a legally cognizable interest in this controversy. That interest is demonstrated by the fact that the members have formed FRC and are supporting this…”
Show all 16 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.