Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-285

Definition of certain terms used in this chapter; process, return, statutory agent

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

As used in this chapter, unless the context requires a different meaning:

1. The term "process" shall be deemed to include notice;

2. The term "return" shall be deemed to include the term "proof of service";

3. The term "statutory agent" means (i) the Commissioner of the Department of Motor Vehicles and the Secretary of the Commonwealth, and the successors of either, when appointed pursuant to law for the purpose of service of process on the nonresident defined in subdivision 2 of § 8.01-307 or (ii) the Clerk of the State Corporation Commission, when appointed pursuant to law for the purpose of service of process on any individual, corporation, limited partnership, or other entity under § 12.1-19.1, as the context may require; and

4. The term "person" includes an individual, his executor, administrator, or other personal representative, or a corporation, partnership, association or any other legal or commercial entity, whether or not a citizen or domiciliary of the Commonwealth and whether or not organized under the laws of the Commonwealth.

1977, c. 617; 1991, c. 672; 2005, c. 866; 2024, c. 454.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 16 cases, 1983–2013 · leading case: Muse Construction Group, Inc. v. Commonwealth of Virginia Board for Contractors

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Muse Construction Group, Inc. v. Commonwealth of Virginia Board for Contractors (2012) vactapp · cites it 8× “Furthermore, Muse’s contention that its actions constituted “process” under the definition of that term in Code § 8.01-285 is likewise unpersuasive.”

Fredericksburg Construction Co. v. J.W. Wyne Excavating, Inc. (2000) va · cites it 2× “Nevertheless, we disagree with Fredericksburg’s contention that Code § 8.”

Collins v. Shepherd (2007) va “Upon finding that service has been timely effected or that due diligence has been exercised to have service timely effected, the court shall maintain the action on the docket and, if service has not been timely effected but due diligence to effect service has been exercised,…”

Bendele Ex Rel. Bendele v. Com. (1999) vactapp · cites it 2× “Code § 8.01-285(1) defines “process” for purposes of interpreting the chapter concerning process within Title 8.”

Campbell v. Hampton Roads Bankshares, Inc. (2013) vaed · cites it 2× “However, counsel for Plaintiff spent no time on this argument during the hearing, and rightfully so.”

Frederick v. Koziol (1990) vaed “The section states that: When the exercise of personal jurisdiction is authorized by this chapter, service of process or notice may be made in the same manner as is provided for in Chapter 8 (§ 8.01-285 et seq.) of this title in any other case in which personal jurisdiction is…”

United Coal Co. v. Land Use Corp. (1983) vawd “When the exercise of personal jurisdiction is authorized by this chapter, service of process or notice may be made in the same manner as is provided for in Chapter 8 (§ 8.01-285 et seq.) of this title in any other case in which personal jurisdiction is exercised over such a…”

Pitchford v. Commonwealth (1986) vactapp · cites it 2× “01-288, regarding service of process states: Except for process commencing actions for divorce or annulment of marriage, process which has reached the person to whom it is directed within the time prescribed by law, if any, shall be sufficient although not served or accepted as…”

Mitchell v. Richmond Medical Center for Women, Inc. (1991) vaccrichmondcty · cites it 2× “Section 8.01-285 defines “process” to include notice within the meaning of § 8.”

Andrea Catherine Williams Key v. James Darren Key, II (2004) vactapp · cites it 2× “§ 8.01-285 [to § 8.01-327.2] in any other case in which personal jurisdiction is exercised over such party”).”

Porter-Blain Corp. v. Virginia Employment Commission (1997) vaccrichmondcty · cites it 3× “The definition of process is found in Va. Code § 8.01-285, which reads: For the purposes of this chapter: 1.”

Willoughby Bay Associates v. Zoning Appeals Board (1997) vaccnorfolk · cites it 3× “In the instant case, Willoughby mailed a copy of its Petition to the Deputy City Attorney because, it claimed, he “provides legal representation to the Board of Zoning Appeals.” Willoughby presented no authority to support this contention and it would appear basically failed to…”

Show all 16 citing cases →

— Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-285(1) — 3 cases

Bendele Ex Rel. Bendele v. Com. (1999) vactapp “Code § 8.01-285(1) defines “process” for purposes of interpreting the chapter concerning process within Title 8.”

Leah Bendele, An Infant v. CW, DMAS (1999) vactapp

Commonwealth v. Beilis (1989) vaccwise

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.