Statute of limitations; promises not to plead.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when HB 409 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on HB 409.
You're tracking HB 409
We'll email you the moment it moves.
HB 409 — Statute of limitations; promises not to plead.
Last action — Approved by Governor-Chapter 477 (effective 7/1/22)
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed House of Delegates
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 11, 2022. Enacted.
Signed by Governor Glenn Youngkin (Republican) on April 11, 2022.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
2 sponsors
1 primary, 1 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 7 recorded votes so far.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Summary
Promises not to plead the statute of limitations. Specifies that a written promise not to plead the statute of limitations is valid only when such written promise is made to avoid or defer litigation pending settlement of any cause of action that has accrued in favor of the promisee against the promisor. The bill further replaces the current requirement of validity that such promise not be made contemporaneously with any other contract with the requirement that the written promise be signed by the promisor or his agent. Finally, the bill specifies that the promisee must commence an action asserting such cause of action within the earlier of the applicable limitations period running from the date the written promise is made or any shorter time provided for in the written promise for such promise to be valid; current law requires that any such written promise may be made for an additional term not longer than the applicable limitations period in order to be valid. The bill provides that its provisions apply only to written promises not to plead the statute of limitations made on or after July 1, 2022. The bill as introduced was a recommendation of the Boyd-Graves Conference.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
39 added · 39 removedPlain-language change summary
The recent amendments to HB 409 clarify the rules regarding promises not to plead the statute of limitations in Virginia. Notably, a written promise not to plead the statute is now explicitly deemed valid unless it was made to avoid or delay litigation in connection with an existing cause of action. This change is important as it strengthens the enforceability of written agreements, offering better protection for individuals relying on such promises in legal matters. Additionally, it reinforces the conditions under which these promises are valid, aiming to prevent fraud and ensure fairness in legal proceedings.
SESSION ENROLLED VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY ––-- 2022 SESSION CHAPTER E477 An Act to amend and reenact § 8.01-232 of the Code of Virginia, relating to effect of promises not to plead statute of limitations.
R O [H 409] L Approved April 11, 2022 Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:
L 1.
E § 8.01-232.
In all other cases, an unwritten promise not to plead the statute shall be void, and a written promise not onlyto whenplead (i)such itstatute theshall writtenbe promisevalid isand madeenforceable to avoidprevent orassertion deferof litigationthe pendingdefense settlement of anythe casestatute cause of action that has accrued in favor of the promisee against the promisor, (ii) it is not made case contemporaneously with any other contract the written promise is signed by the promisor or his agent, and (iii) it is made for an additional term not longer than the promisee commences an action asHertingasserting such cause of action within the earlier of (a) the applicable limitations period running from t4ethe date the written promise is made or (b) any shorter time as may be provided in the written promise.
No 9provision proB.of this subsection shall operate contrary to subsections B and C.
B.
No acknowledgment or promise by one of two or more joint contractors shall charge any of such contractors in any case in which but for such acknowledgment another contractor would have been proD.protected under a statute of limitations.
D.
or under authorizing provisions, policies, or procedures for procurement of such contracts by any public body claims,exempted orfrom actionsthe assertedforegoing; under such contracts by a public body.
Ashowever, usedsuch inwaiver this subsection,nds, "subcontract" includes any contract or purchasepromise ordernot to supplyplead labor,applies equipment,only materials, or services to andemands, entityclaims, awarded a contract with a public body or toactions anyasserted lower-tierunder entitysuch performingcontracts workby provided for in such a contract.public body.
As used in this subsection, "subcontract" includes any contract or purchase order to supply labor, equipment, materials, or services to an entity awarded a contract with a public body or to any lower-tier entity performing work provided for in such a contract.
View plain text versions (3)
- CHAP0477 View text Current pdf April 11, 2022
- HB409ER View text pdf February 25, 2022
- Prefiled Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/12/22 22101575D pdf January 11, 2022
Action History
-
Approved by Governor-Chapter 477 (effective 7/1/22)
-
Governor's Action Deadline 11:59 p.m., April 11, 2022
-
Enrolled Bill communicated to Governor on March 11, 2022
-
Signed by President
-
Signed by Speaker
-
Enrolled
-
VOTE: Adoption (100-Y 0-N)
-
Senate amendment agreed to by House (100-Y 0-N)
-
Passed Senate with amendment (40-Y 0-N)
-
Engrossed by Senate as amended
-
Committee amendment agreed to
-
Reading of amendment waived
-
Read third time
-
Constitutional reading dispensed (38-Y 0-N)
-
Reported from Judiciary with amendment (14-Y 0-N)
-
Referred to Committee on the Judiciary
-
Constitutional reading dispensed
-
VOTE: Passage (94-Y 6-N)
-
Read third time and passed House (94-Y 6-N)
-
Read second time and engrossed
-
Read first time
-
Reported from Courts of Justice (15-Y 3-N)
-
Subcommittee recommends reporting (7-Y 1-N)
-
Assigned Courts sub: Subcommittee #2
-
Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
-
Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/12/22 22101575D
Sponsors
- Jason S. Ballard · Primary
- Jeffrey L. Campbell · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 146 not signed on · 8 voted No
Sponsors (1)
Co-sponsors (1)
Not signed on (146)
146 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 146 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 99 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 99 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (99)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 40 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 40 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (40)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 38 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 38 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 95% | 0% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (40)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (14)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| McClellan, Jennifer L. | — | Yea |
| Morrissey, Joseph D. | — | Yea |
| Edwards, John S. | — | Yea |
| Jennifer B. Boysko | — | Yea |
| L. Louise Lucas | — | Yea |
| Mark J. Peake | — | Yea |
| Norment, Thomas K., Jr. | — | Yea |
| Petersen, J. Chapman | — | Yea |
| R. Creigh Deeds | — | Yea |
| Richard H. Stuart | — | Yea |
| Ryan T. McDougle | — | Yea |
| Saslaw, Richard L. | — | Yea |
| Scott A. Surovell | — | Yea |
| William M. Stanley, Jr. | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 93 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 93 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 94% | 6% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (99)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 15 | 3 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 15 | 3 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 75% | 15% | 0% | 10% |
How each member voted (20)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Adams, Les R. | — | Yea |
| Bell, Robert B. | — | Yea |
| Bourne, Jeffrey M. | — | Yea |
| Campbell, Jeffrey L. | — | Not Voting |
| Campbell, Ronnie R. | — | Yea |
| Charniele L. Herring | — | Nay |
| Don Scott | — | Yea |
| Freitas, Nicholas J. | — | Yea |
| James A. "Jay" Leftwich | — | Yea |
| Jason S. Ballard | — | Yea |
| Jessica L. Anderson | — | Yea |
| Karrie K. Delaney | — | Yea |
| Keam, Mark L. | — | Yea |
| Marcus B. Simon | — | Nay |
| Patrick A. Hope | — | Nay |
| Ransone, Margaret B. | — | Yea |
| Richard C. "Rip" Sullivan, Jr. | — | Yea |
| Terry G. Kilgore | — | Not Voting |
| Vivian E. Watts | — | Yea |
| Wren M. Williams | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 7 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 78% | 11% | 0% | 11% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bell, Robert B. | — | Not Voting |
| Bourne, Jeffrey M. | — | Yea |
| Campbell, Jeffrey L. | — | Yea |
| James A. "Jay" Leftwich | — | Yea |
| Jason S. Ballard | — | Yea |
| Jessica L. Anderson | — | Yea |
| Marcus B. Simon | — | Nay |
| Patrick A. Hope | — | Yea |
| Terry G. Kilgore | — | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does HB 409 do?
- Promises not to plead the statute of limitations. Specifies that a written promise not to plead the statute of limitations is valid only when such written promise is made to avoid or defer litigation pending settlement of any cause of action that has accrued in favor of the promisee against the promisor. The bill further replaces the current requirement of validity that such promise not be made contemporaneously with any other contract with the requirement that the written promise be signed by the promisor or his agent. Finally, the bill specifies that the promisee must commence an action asserting such cause of action within the earlier of the applicable limitations period running from the date the written promise is made or any shorter time provided for in the written promise for such promise to be valid; current law requires that any such written promise may be made for an additional term not longer than the applicable limitations period in order to be valid. The bill provides that its provisions apply only to written promises not to plead the statute of limitations made on or after July 1, 2022. The bill as introduced was a recommendation of the Boyd-Graves Conference.
- Who sponsors HB 409?
- HB 409 is sponsored by Jason S. Ballard and Campbell, Jeffrey L..
- What is the current status of HB 409?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 11, 2022. Enacted.
- Where can I track HB 409?
- Track HB 409 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on HB 409
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of HB 409
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →