Court of Appeals of Virginia; maximum number of judges, summary disposition of certain civil cases.
This bill proposes changes to the maximum number of judges in the Court of Appeals of Virginia and how some civil cases may be handled. It aims to streamline the court's operations.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when HB1485 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 HB1485.
You're tracking HB1485
We'll email you the moment it moves.
HB1485 — Court of Appeals of Virginia; maximum number of judges, summary disposition of certain civil cases.
Last action — Continued from last session
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
1Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed House of Delegates
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been introduced in the House of Delegates. Introduced January 23, 2026. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
Next likely step: a committee referral and hearing.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
LowHow often bills like it became law.
-
Introduced
Current position in the legislative process.
-
1 sponsor
1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 5 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.
In plain language
The bill addresses the maximum number of judges in the Court of Appeals of Virginia and civil case dispositions.
This bill proposes changes to the maximum number of judges in the Court of Appeals of Virginia and how some civil cases may be handled. It aims to streamline the court's operations.
Summary
Court of Appeals of Virginia; maximum number of judges, summary disposition of certain civil cases.
Bill Text
We don't have the full text on file for this bill yet.
Read HB1485 on the official Virginia source →Compared against the Code of Virginia as published AI-generated reading aid — verify against the official bill.
This bill amends 3 section(s) of the Code of Virginia: 17.1-400, 17.1-402, 17.1-403.
-
17.1-400
17Strikes “17”.
-
17.1-400
2
Inserts “2”.
-
17.1-400
1
Inserts “1”.
-
17.1-400
ChairmenStrikes “Chairmen”.
-
17.1-400
Chairs
Inserts “Chairs”.
-
17.1-400
ChairmenStrikes “Chairmen”.
-
17.1-400
Chairs
Inserts “Chairs”.
-
17.1-400
withoutStrikes “without”.
-
17.1-400
outside of
Inserts “outside of”.
-
17.1-400
or herStrikes “or her”.
-
17.1-400
of this sectionStrikes “of this section”.
-
17.1-400
,
Inserts “,”.
-
17.1-402
sixStrikes “six”.
-
17.1-402
eight
Inserts “eight”.
-
17.1-402
fiveStrikes “five”.
-
17.1-402
seven
Inserts “seven”.
-
17.1-402
sitStrikes “sit”.
-
17.1-402
perform its en banc function by such number of judges as may be prescribed by rule of the
Inserts “perform its en banc function by such number of judges as may be prescribed by rule of the”.
-
17.1-402
Supreme Court of Virginia, provided that the court sits
Inserts “Supreme Court of Virginia, provided that the court sits”.
-
17.1-403
A.
Inserts “A.”.
-
17.1-403
B.
Inserts “B.”.
-
17.1-403
C. In a civil case, if the panel unanimously agrees that the case is wholly without merit and the record below contains reasoned bases resolving the issues raised on appeal, the Court of Appeals may summarily affirm the decision below.
Inserts “C. In a civil case, if the panel unanimously agrees that the case is wholly without merit and the record below contains reasoned bases resolving the issues raised on appeal, the Court of Appeals may summarily affirm the decision below.”.
-
17.1-403
A.
Inserts “A.”.
-
17.1-403
B.
Inserts “B.”.
-
17.1-403
C. In a civil case, if the panel unanimously agrees that the case is wholly without merit and the record below contains reasoned bases resolving the issues raised on appeal,
Inserts “C. In a civil case, if the panel unanimously agrees that the case is wholly without merit and the record below contains reasoned bases resolving the issues raised on appeal,”.
-
17.1-403
the Court of Appeals may summarily affirm the decision below.
Inserts “the Court of Appeals may summarily affirm the decision below.”.
Action History
-
S Continued to next session in Finance and Appropriations (14-Y 0-N)
-
H Fiscal Impact Statement from Department of Planning and Budget (HB1485)
-
S Committee substitute printed 26108371D-S1
-
S Rereferred to Finance and Appropriations
-
S Reported from Courts of Justice with substitute and rereferred to Finance and Appropriations (9-Y 5-N)
-
S Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
-
S Constitutional reading dispensed (on 1st reading)
-
H Read third time and passed House (84-Y 14-N 0-A)
-
H Engrossed by House as amended
-
H committee amendment agreed to
-
H Read second time
-
H Moved from Uncontested Calendar to Regular Calendar
-
H Read first time
-
H Reported from Courts of Justice with amendment(s) (22-Y 0-N)
-
H Fiscal Impact Statement from Department of Planning and Budget (HB1485)
-
H Placed on Courts of Justice Agenda
-
H Subcommittee recommends reporting with amendment(s) and referring to Appropriations (10-Y 0-N)
-
H Placed on Courts of Justice Agenda
-
H Assigned HCJ sub: Criminal
-
H Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
-
H Presented and ordered printed 26105533D
Sponsors
- Patrick A. Hope · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 147 not signed on · 19 voted No
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 | 9 | 5 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 9 | 5 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 60% | 33% | 0% | 7% |
How each member voted (15)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Barbara A. Favola | — | Yea |
| Glen H. Sturtevant, Jr. | — | Nay |
| Jennifer B. Boysko | — | Yea |
| Jennifer D. Carroll Foy | — | Yea |
| Kannan Srinivasan | — | Yea |
| Mark D. Obenshain | — | Nay |
| Mark J. Peake | — | Nay |
| Michael J. Jones | — | Yea |
| R. Creigh Deeds | — | Yea |
| Richard H. Stuart | — | Not Voting |
| Russet Perry | — | Yea |
| Ryan T. McDougle | — | Nay |
| Saddam Azlan Salim | — | Yea |
| Scott A. Surovell | — | Yea |
| William M. Stanley, Jr. | — | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 14 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 14 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 93% | 0% | 0% | 7% |
How each member voted (15)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Aaron R. Rouse | — | Yea |
| Barbara A. Favola | — | Yea |
| Bryce E. Reeves | — | Yea |
| Jennifer B. Boysko | — | Yea |
| Jeremy S. McPike | — | Yea |
| L. Louise Lucas | — | Yea |
| Lamont Bagby | — | Yea |
| Lashrecse D. Aird | — | Yea |
| Mamie E. Locke | — | Yea |
| Mark D. Obenshain | — | Yea |
| R. Creigh Deeds | — | Yea |
| Richard H. Stuart | — | Not Voting |
| Ryan T. McDougle | — | Yea |
| Scott A. Surovell | — | Yea |
| Todd E. Pillion | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 84 | 14 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 84 | 14 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 84% | 14% | 0% | 2% |
How each member voted (100)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (22)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Atoosa R. Reaser | — | Yea |
| Charlie Schmidt | — | Yea |
| James A. "Jay" Leftwich | — | Yea |
| Jason S. Ballard | — | Yea |
| Justin Pence | — | Yea |
| Karen Keys-Gamarra | — | Yea |
| Karen R. "Kacey" Carnegie | — | Yea |
| Karrie K. Delaney | — | Yea |
| Katrina Callsen | — | Yea |
| Leslie Chambers Mehta | — | Yea |
| Madison Whittle | — | Yea |
| Marcus B. Simon | — | Yea |
| Michelle Lopes Maldonado | — | Yea |
| Patrick A. Hope | — | Yea |
| Phil M. Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Rae Cousins | — | Yea |
| Richard C. "Rip" Sullivan, Jr. | — | Yea |
| Terry G. Kilgore | — | Yea |
| Virgil Thornton | — | Yea |
| Vivian E. Watts | — | Yea |
| Will Davis | — | Yea |
| Wren M. Williams | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 10 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 10 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 91% | 0% | 0% | 9% |
How each member voted (11)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Charlie Schmidt | — | Yea |
| Karrie K. Delaney | — | Yea |
| Katrina Callsen | — | Yea |
| Leslie Chambers Mehta | — | Yea |
| Madison Whittle | — | Yea |
| Patrick A. Hope | — | Not Voting |
| Phil M. Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Rae Cousins | — | Yea |
| Vivian E. Watts | — | Yea |
| Will Davis | — | Yea |
| Wren M. Williams | — | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does HB1485 do?
- Court of Appeals of Virginia; maximum number of judges, summary disposition of certain civil cases.
- Who sponsors HB1485?
- HB1485 is sponsored by Patrick A. Hope.
- What is the current status of HB1485?
- This bill has been introduced in the House of Delegates. Introduced January 23, 2026. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
- Where can I track HB1485?
- Track HB1485 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on HB1485
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 HB1485
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →