Service of process; investigator employed by an attorney for the Commonwealth, etc.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 291 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 SB 291.
You're tracking SB 291
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 291 — Service of process; investigator employed by an attorney for the Commonwealth, etc.
Last action — Approved by Governor-Chapter 248 (effective 7/1/22)
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓Passed House of Delegates
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 11, 2022. Enacted.
Signed by Governor Glenn Youngkin (Republican) on April 08, 2022.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
1 sponsor
1 primary, 0 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
Service of process; investigator employed by an attorney for the Commonwealth or Indigent Defense Commission. Provides that all investigators employed by an attorney for the Commonwealth or by the Indigent Defense Commission while engaged in the performance of their official duties when serving witness subpoenas shall not be considered a party or otherwise interested in the subject matter in controversy and, thus, are authorized to serve process to such witnesses. This bill is identical to HB 682.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
40 added · 40 removedPlain-language change summary
The amendment to Bill SB 291 clarifies and expands the criteria for who is authorized to serve legal process in Virginia. It now specifies that certain investigators, who are employed by attorneys for the Commonwealth or the Indigent Defense Commission and have a background as active law enforcement officers, are allowed to serve process as long as they are not considered parties in the cases they handle, with the sheriff's agreement. This change is significant because it increases the pool of qualified individuals who can serve legal documents, potentially leading to more efficient processing of legal matters.
SESSION ENROLLED VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY ––-- 2022 SESSION CHAPTER E248 An Act to amend and reenact § 8.01-293 of the Code of Virginia, relating to service of process;Nprocess; investigator employed by an attorney for the Commonwealth or Indigent Defense Commission.
Rinvestigator Oemployed [Sby 291]an Lattorney Approvedfor Be it enacted by the GeneralCommonwealth Assemblyor ofIndigent Virginia:Defense Commission.
L[S 1.291] Approved April 8, 2022 Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:
1.
E § 8.01-293.
D A.
subject2. matter in controversy.
ForAny purposesperson of thisage subdivision,18 anyears investigatorof employedage byor anolder attorneyand who is not a party or otherwise interested in the for the Commonwealth or employed by the Indigent Defense Commission, who within 10 yearsyearsd by an attorney immediately prior to being employed by the attorney for the Commonwealth or Indigent Defense Commission was an active law-enforcement officer as defined in § 9.1-101 in the Commonwealth anSand retired or resigned from his position as a law-enforcement officer in good standing, shall not 2ebe considered to be a party or otherwise interested in the subject matter in controversy while eng1ged in an investigator employed by an attorney for the Commonwealth shall not be considered to be a party oron, otherwise interested in the subject matter in controversy while engaged in the performance of his official duties,duties providedwhen thatserving thewitness sheriffsubpoenas. in the jurisdiction where process is to be served has agreed that such investigators investigator may serve process.
For purposes of this subdivision, an investigator employed by an attorney for the Commonwealth shall not be considered to be a party or otherwise interested in the subject matter in controversy while engaged in the performance of his official duties, provided that the sheriff in the jurisdiction where process is to be served has agreed that such investigators investigator may serve process.
However, in any case in which custody or visitation of a minor child or children is at issue and a summons is issued for the attendance and testimony of a teacher or other school personnel who is not a party to the proceeding, if suchendancesuch summons is served on school property, it shall be served only by a sheriff or his deputy;
For purposes of this section, "private process server" means any person 18 years of age or older and who is not a party or otherwise interested in the subject matter in controversy, and who charges a fee for service of process.
Whenever in this Code the term "officer" or "sheriff" is used to refer to persons authorized to make, personreturn, authorizedor bydo thisany sectionother act relating to serveservice process.process,of process, such term shall be deemed to refer to any B.person authorized by this section to serve process.
B.
View plain text versions (4)
- CHAP0248 View text Current pdf April 08, 2022
- SB291ER View text pdf March 09, 2022
- Committee Substitute Committee substitute printed 22106908D-H1 pdf February 25, 2022
- Prefiled Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/12/22 22100342D pdf January 11, 2022
Action History
-
Approved by Governor-Chapter 248 (effective 7/1/22)
-
Governor's Action Deadline 11:59 p.m., April 11, 2022
-
Enrolled Bill Communicated to Governor on March 22, 2022
-
Signed by President
-
Signed by Speaker
-
Enrolled
-
Title replaced 22106908D-H1
-
House substitute agreed to by Senate (39-Y 0-N)
-
VOTE: Passage (99-Y 0-N)
-
Passed House with substitute (99-Y 0-N)
-
Engrossed by House - committee substitute SB291H1
-
Committee substitute agreed to 22106908D-H1
-
Read third time
-
Passed by for the day
-
Read second time
-
Committee substitute printed 22106908D-H1
-
Reported from Courts of Justice with substitute (20-Y 0-N)
-
Subcommittee recommends reporting with substitute (8-Y 0-N)
-
House subcommittee amendments and substitutes offered
-
Assigned Courts sub: Subcommittee #2
-
Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
-
Read first time
-
Placed on Calendar
-
Read third time and passed Senate (40-Y 0-N)
-
Read second time and engrossed
-
Constitutional reading dispensed (37-Y 0-N)
-
Reported from Judiciary (15-Y 0-N)
-
Referred to Committee on the Judiciary
-
Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/12/22 22100342D
Sponsors
- R. Creigh Deeds · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 147 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (147)
147 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 147 →"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 | 39 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 39 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 98% | 0% | 0% | 3% |
How each member voted (40)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 98 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 98 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 99% | 0% | 0% | 1% |
How each member voted (99)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (20)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Adams, Les R. | — | Yea |
| Bell, Robert B. | — | Yea |
| Bourne, Jeffrey M. | — | Yea |
| Campbell, Jeffrey L. | — | Yea |
| Campbell, Ronnie R. | — | Yea |
| Charniele L. Herring | — | Yea |
| 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 | — | Yea |
| Patrick A. Hope | — | Yea |
| Ransone, Margaret B. | — | Yea |
| Richard C. "Rip" Sullivan, Jr. | — | Yea |
| Terry G. Kilgore | — | Yea |
| Vivian E. Watts | — | Yea |
| Wren M. Williams | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 89% | 0% | 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 | — | Yea |
| Patrick A. Hope | — | Yea |
| Terry G. Kilgore | — | Yea |
| 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 | 37 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Total | 37 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| % of votes cast | 93% | 0% | 0% | 8% |
How each member voted (40)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (15)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| McClellan, Jennifer L. | — | Yea |
| Morrissey, Joseph D. | — | Yea |
| Edwards, John S. | — | Yea |
| Jennifer B. Boysko | — | Yea |
| L. Louise Lucas | — | Yea |
| Mark D. Obenshain | — | 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 |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 291 do?
- Service of process; investigator employed by an attorney for the Commonwealth or Indigent Defense Commission. Provides that all investigators employed by an attorney for the Commonwealth or by the Indigent Defense Commission while engaged in the performance of their official duties when serving witness subpoenas shall not be considered a party or otherwise interested in the subject matter in controversy and, thus, are authorized to serve process to such witnesses. This bill is identical to HB 682.
- Who sponsors SB 291?
- SB 291 is sponsored by R. Creigh Deeds.
- What is the current status of SB 291?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 11, 2022. Enacted.
- Where can I track SB 291?
- Track SB 291 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 291
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 SB 291
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →