Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-424 (2026)

Approval of compromises on behalf of persons under a disability in suits or actions to which they are parties

✓ current as of May 2026

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

A. In any action or suit wherein a person under a disability is a party, the court in which the matter is pending shall have the power to approve and confirm a compromise of the matters in controversy on behalf of such party, including claims under the provisions of any liability insurance policy, if such compromise is deemed to be to the interest of the party. Any order or decree approving and confirming the compromise shall be binding upon such party, except that the same may be set aside for fraud.

B. In case of damage to the person or property of a person under a disability, caused by the wrongful act, neglect, or default of any person, when death did not ensue therefrom, any person or insurer interested in compromise of any claim for such damages, including any claim under the provisions of any liability insurance policy, may, upon motion to the court in which the action is pending for the recovery of damages on account of such injury, or if no such action is pending, then to any circuit court, move the court to approve the compromise. The court shall require the movant to give reasonable notice of such motion to all parties and to any person found by the court to be interested in the compromise.

C. A compromise action involving a claim for wrongful death shall be in accordance with the applicable provisions of § 8.01-55. Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the provisions of § 8.01-76.

D. In any compromise action, the court shall direct the payment of the proceeds of the compromise agreement, when approved, as follows:

1. Payment of the sum into court as provided by § 8.01-600 or to the general receiver of such court;

2. In the case of damage to the person or property of a minor, by investment in a college savings trust account for which the minor is the beneficiary pursuant to a college savings trust agreement with the Commonwealth Savers Plan as set forth in subsection B of § 23.1-707, provided that (i) the investment options pursuant to such agreement are restricted to target enrollment portfolios; (ii) the order or decree approving and confirming the compromise requires the minor beneficiary's parent, as that term is defined in § 22.1-1, to act as the custodian of the account; and (iii) except in the case of a distribution from the account to be applied toward the minor beneficiary's qualified higher education expenses, as that term is defined in § 529 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or other applicable federal law, the order or decree approving and confirming the compromise prohibits the minor beneficiary's parent from making any transfer, withdrawal, termination, or other account transaction unless the court provides prior approval pursuant to a written order;

3. To a duly qualified fiduciary of the person under a disability, after due inquiry as to the adequacy of the bond of such fiduciary;

4. As provided in § 8.01-606; or

5. Where the agreement of settlement provides for payments to be made over a period of time in the future, whether such payments are lump sum, periodic, or a combination of both, the court shall approve the settlement only if it finds that all payments which are due to be made are (i) secured by a bond issued by an insurance company authorized to write such bonds in this Commonwealth or (ii) to be made or irrevocably guaranteed by an insurance company or companies authorized to do business in this Commonwealth and rated "A plus" (A+) or better by Best's Insurance Reports. Payments made under this subdivision totaling not more than $4,000 in any calendar year may be paid in accordance with § 8.01-606. Payments made under this subdivision totaling more than $4,000 in any calendar year while the recipient is under a disability shall be paid to a duly qualified fiduciary after due inquiry as to adequacy of the bond of such fiduciary.

E. Payments made under this section, in the case of damage to the person or property of a minor, may be made payable in the discretion of the court to the parent or guardian of the minor to be held in trust for the benefit of the minor. Any such trust shall be subject to court approval and the court may provide for the termination of such trust at any time following attainment of majority which the court deems to be in the best interest of the minor. In an order authorizing the trust or additions to an existing trust, the court may order that the trustee thereof be subject to the same duty to qualify in the clerk's office and to file an inventory and annual accountings with the commissioner of accounts as would apply to a testamentary trustee.

Code 1950, §§ 8-169, 8-170; 1956, c. 575; 1960, cc. 301, 302; 1964, c. 500; 1970, c. 10; 1977, c. 617; 1985, c. 499; 1988, c. 409; 1991, cc. 97, 257; 1993, c. 945; 1994, c. 39; 1998, cc. 584, 607, 610; 2009, c. 688; 2022, c. 535; 2024, c. 217.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 25 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: Parrish v. Jessee, 464 S.E.2d 141 (Va. 1995).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Parrish v. Jessee, 464 S.E.2d 141 (Va. 1995). · cites it 36× “The parties reached a compromise and submitted a settlement agreement to the Richmond court for approval pursuant to Code § 8.01-424. Incorporated into the motion for approval were exhibits detailing the proposed settlement, an agreement of assignment between Mega Contractors'…”

In re: Woodley, 777 S.E.2d 560 (Va. 2015). · cites it 6× “01-244(B) (statute of limitations for wrongful death actions); Code § 8.01-424 (judicial approval of settlements involving persons under a disability); Code § 64.”

Jeneary v. Commonwealth, 551 S.E.2d 321 (Va. 2001). · cites it 6× “On September 22, 1999, Steele, apparently already aware that the wrongful death action would be filed, had petitioned the trial court, pursuant to Code § 8.01-424, to approve a compromise settlement of the claim against him in the amount of $250,000 to be paid on his behalf…”

Bohle v. Henrico Cnty. Sch. Bd., 431 S.E.2d 36 (Va. 1993). · cites it 4× “" On December 6, 1989, the Circuit Court of Henrico County, pursuant to Code § 8.01-424, approved a settlement between the guardian of the incapacitated employee and third-party tortfeasors in the amount of $1.”

Hayman v. Patio Prods., Inc., 311 S.E.2d 752 (Va. 1984). · cites it 4× “, or as ordered by the Court pursuant to Section 8.01-424 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, the sum of Forty-Three Thousand, Five Hundred and 00/100 Dollars ($43,500.”

Cauthorn v. British Leyland, UK, Ltd., 355 S.E.2d 306 (Va. 1987). · cites it 4× “These insurance companies petitioned the court under Code § 8.01-424 for approval of a compromise settlement of Rebecca's personal injury claim for $100,000, the maximum aggregate coverage under the policies.”

Smith v. Settle, 492 S.E.2d 427 (Va. 1997). · cites it 2× “3 When it was beneficial to either side’s argument not to be bound by the high-low agreement at various times during the course of this prolonged litigation, that side noted the infancy of two plaintiffs and the absence of court approval of the “settlement” under Code §…”

Gunn v. Richmond Cmty. Hosp., Inc., 367 S.E.2d 480 (Va. 1988). · cites it 5× “” It says the purpose of Code § 8.01-424(B) is to limit the guardian’s ability to compromise a claim, not to curtail the court’s inherent powers over the ward’s estate.”

Crawford v. Loving, 84 F.R.D. 80 (E.D. Va. 1979). · cites it 4× “See Va.Code § 8.01-424 (Repl.1977). . It is noteworthy that this section is not specifically drawn for use in pending litigation.”

Dudley v. Cash, 82 Va. Cir. 1 (Augusta Cir. Ct. 2010). · cites it 3× “The Amended Motion comes before the Court pursuant to Va. Code § 8.01-424, authorizing court approval of compromise settlements negotiated on behalf of persons under a disability.”

J.K., by His Parents/Next Friends, Monte & Ginger Kuligowski v. Trustgard Ins. Co. (Va. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 33× “Monte and Ginger Kuligowski (“the parents”)1 argue that Code § 8.01-424 unconstitutionally infringes upon their fundamental right, as fit parents, to manage their child’s settlement proceeds absent a finding of unfitness.”

Commonwealth v. Huynh ex rel. Tien Ha, 546 S.E.2d 677 (Va. 2001). · cites it 2× “Following a hearing, the trial court entered an order approving the amount and terms of the infant settlement pursuant to Code § 8.01-424. 1 The order further provided that the trial court would reduce the Commonwealth’s lien on the ground that “the equities of this tragic case,…”

Show all 25 citing cases →

— Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-424(A) — 3 cases

In re: Woodley, 777 S.E.2d 560 (Va. 2015). “01-244(B) (statute of limitations for wrongful death actions); Code § 8.01-424 (judicial approval of settlements involving persons under a disability); Code § 64.”

J.K., by His Parents/Next Friends, Monte & Ginger Kuligowski v. Trustgard Ins. Co. (Va. Ct. App. 2025). “Monte and Ginger Kuligowski (“the parents”)1 argue that Code § 8.01-424 unconstitutionally infringes upon their fundamental right, as fit parents, to manage their child’s settlement proceeds absent a finding of unfitness.”

In re: Woodley (Va. 2015).

— Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-424(B) — 1 case

Gunn v. Richmond Cmty. Hosp., Inc., 367 S.E.2d 480 (Va. 1988). “” It says the purpose of Code § 8.01-424(B) is to limit the guardian’s ability to compromise a claim, not to curtail the court’s inherent powers over the ward’s estate.”

— Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-424(D) — 1 case

— Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-424(D)(1) — 1 case

— Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-424(D)(4) — 1 case

Parrish v. Jessee, 464 S.E.2d 141 (Va. 1995). “The parties reached a compromise and submitted a settlement agreement to the Richmond court for approval pursuant to Code § 8.01-424. Incorporated into the motion for approval were exhibits detailing the proposed settlement, an agreement of assignment between Mega Contractors'…”

— Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-424(E) — 3 cases

In re: Woodley (Va. 2015).

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.