7829798.01-223Virginia Decodedhttps://vacode.org2016Civil Remedies And ProcedureActionsMiscellaneous ProvisionsLack of privity no defense in certain casesCode 1950, § 8-654.4; 1966, c. 439; 1977, c. 617.Sensenbrenner v. Rust, Orling & NealeRecord No. 880249374 S.E.2d 551988-11-18https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1400500/sensenbrenner-v-rust-orling-neale/ . . . of lack of privity had been abolished by Code § 8.01-223. The district court, relying on Bryant . . . <abbr title="Supreme Court of Virginia">SCV</abbr> . . . Bryant Electric Company, Inc. v. City of Fredericksburg and . . . 84-1137762 F.2d 11921985-05-23https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/452975/bryant-electric-company-inc-v-city-of-fredericksburg-and-malcolm-pirnie/ . . . . . . Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitBlake Const. Co., Inc. v. AlleyRecord No. 831942353 S.E.2d 7241987-03-06https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1393716/blake-const-co-inc-v-alley/ . . . dismissed the action with prejudice. . . . <abbr title="Supreme Court of Virginia">SCV</abbr>Ward v. Ernst & YoungRecord No. 921107435 S.E.2d 6281993-09-17https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1225148/ward-v-ernst-young/ . . . appeal, the general contractor invoked Code § 8.01-223 which provides that "where recovery of . . . <abbr title="Supreme Court of Virginia">SCV</abbr>Copenhaver v. RogersRecord No. 880807384 S.E.2d 5931989-09-22https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1203573/copenhaver-v-rogers/ . . . have been modified by statute. See, e.g., Code §§ 8.01-223 and 8.2-318. Instead, this is a case . . . <abbr title="Supreme Court of Virginia">SCV</abbr>Hess v. Snyder Hunt Corp.Record No. 891362392 S.E.2d 8171990-06-08https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1303296/hess-v-snyder-hunt-corp/ . . . abolition of lack of privity as a defense, Code § 8.01-223, architects, engineers, and building . . . <abbr title="Supreme Court of Virginia">SCV</abbr> . . . Dorothy M. Farish, Guardian for Shirley F. Farish v. Courion . . . 82-1964722 F.2d 741983-12-01https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/427645/dorothy-m-farish-guardian-for-shirley-f-farish-v-courion-industries/ . . . caused by the negligence. Virginia Code Sec. 8.01-223 (1977). These statutes are in derogation of . . . Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit . . . Michael Redman v. John D. Brush and Company, D/B/A Sentry . . . 95-3215111 F.3d 11741997-04-28https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/739919/michael-redman-v-john-d-brush-and-company-dba-sentry-group/Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit . . . Dorothy M. Farish, Guardian for Shirley F. Farish v. Courion . . . 83-2203754 F.2d 11111985-04-22https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/447948/dorothy-m-farish-guardian-for-shirley-f-farish-v-courion-industries/ . . . court that the Virginia legislature intended Secs. 8.01-223 and 8.2-318 to apply prospectively only . . . Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitTravis v. Finley1938002548 S.E.2d 9062001-07-17https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1064985/travis-v-finley/ . . . against father. She argues, pursuant to Code § 8.01-223.1,[2] the assertion of her Fifth *910 . . . <abbr title="Court of Appeals">COA</abbr>http://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/8.01-223/8.2-318When lack of privity no defense in action against manufacturer or seller of goods/8.2-318//8.01-223/8.01/3/21/8.01-223

In cases not provided for in § 8.2-318 where recovery of damages for injury to person, including death, or to property resulting from negligence is sought, lack of privity between the parties shall be no defense.section

1