Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-400 (2026)

Communications between ministers of religion and persons they counsel or advise (Supreme Court Rule 2:503 derived in part from this section)

✓ current as of May 2026

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

No regular minister, priest, rabbi, or accredited practitioner over the age of eighteen years, of any religious organization or denomination usually referred to as a church, shall be required to give testimony as a witness or to relinquish notes, records or any written documentation made by such person, or disclose the contents of any such notes, records or written documentation, in discovery proceedings in any civil action which would disclose any information communicated to him in a confidential manner, properly entrusted to him in his professional capacity and necessary to enable him to discharge the functions of his office according to the usual course of his practice or discipline, wherein such person so communicating such information about himself or another is seeking spiritual counsel and advice relative to and growing out of the information so imparted.

Code 1950, § 8-289.2; 1962, c. 466; 1977, c. 617; 1979, c. 3; 1994, c. 198.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1992–2003 · leading case: Blough v. Food Lion, Inc., 142 F.R.D. 622 (E.D. Va. 1992).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Blough v. Food Lion, Inc., 142 F.R.D. 622 (E.D. Va. 1992). · cites it 12× “On July 8, 1992, TPCS, represented by counsel, moved to quash the subpoena duces tecum on the grounds that the records are protected under the privilege established by Va.Code Ann. § 8.01-400. On July 24, 1992, pursuant to Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Food…”

Nestle v. Commonwealth, 470 S.E.2d 133 (Va. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 5× “The Court analyzed Code § 8.01-400, which is the civil counterpart to Code § 19.”

Madison v. Riter, 355 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2003). “, Va.Code Ann. §§ 8.01-400, 19.2-271.3 (2000).”

Burke v. Burke, 59 Va. Cir. 86 (2002). · cites it 6× “Husband defended *87 against the request citing Va. Code § 8.01-400, which is a statutory enactment of the priest-penitent privilege.”

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.