Firearms; award of court costs, etc., to entity that prevails in action challenging locality. (HB1655)

Introduced By

Sen. Bill Carrico (R-Grayson)


Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law


Control of firearms; award of court costs and fees. Requires a court to award reasonable attorney fees, expenses, and court costs to any entity that prevails in an action challenging an ordinance, resolution, motion, or administrative action as being in conflict with a locality's authority to control firearms pursuant to 15.2-915. Read the Bill »


Bill Has Passed


12/12/2008Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/14/09 097759460
12/12/2008Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
01/20/2009Assigned Courts sub: Criminal
01/21/2009Referred from Courts of Justice
01/21/2009Referred to Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety
01/27/2009Assigned MPPS sub: #1
01/29/2009Subcommittee recommends reporting with amendment(s)
02/06/2009Reported from Militia, Police and Public Safety with substitute (19-Y 3-N) (see vote tally)
02/06/2009Committee substitute printed 096018460-H1
02/08/2009Read first time
02/09/2009Read second time
02/09/2009Committee substitute agreed to 096018460-H1
02/09/2009Engrossed by House - committee substitute HB1655H1
02/10/2009Read third time and passed House (82-Y 16-N)
02/10/2009VOTE: --- PASSAGE (82-Y 16-N) (see vote tally)
02/11/2009Constitutional reading dispensed
02/11/2009Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
02/16/2009Reported from Courts of Justice with amendment (10-Y 4-N) (see vote tally)
02/17/2009Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/18/2009Passed by for the day
02/19/2009Read third time
02/19/2009Reading of amendment waived
02/19/2009Committee amendment agreed to
02/19/2009Engrossed by Senate as amended
02/19/2009Passed Senate with amendment (33-Y 6-N) (see vote tally)
02/19/2009Reconsideration of Senate passage agreed to by Senate (37-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/19/2009Passed Senate with amendment (30-Y 10-N) (see vote tally)
02/20/2009Placed on Calendar
02/23/2009Senate amendment rejected by House (18-Y 81-N)
02/23/2009VOTE: --- REJECTED (18-Y 81-N) (see vote tally)
02/25/2009Senate insisted on amendment (35-Y 5-N) (see vote tally)
02/25/2009Senate requested conference committee
02/26/2009House acceded to request
02/26/2009Conferees appointed by House
02/26/2009Delegates: Carrico, Wright, Bowling
02/26/2009Conferees appointed by Senate
02/26/2009Senators: Puller, Smith, Marsh
02/28/2009Conference report agreed to by House (84-Y 10-N)
02/28/2009VOTE: --- ADOPTION (84-Y 10-N) (see vote tally)
02/28/2009Conference report agreed to by Senate (37-Y 1-N) (see vote tally)
03/09/2009Bill text as passed House and Senate (HB1655ER)
03/09/2009Signed by President
03/11/2009Signed by Speaker
03/30/2009G Approved by Governor-Chapter 735 (effective 7/1/09)
03/30/2009G Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0735)


This bill was discussed on the floor of the General Assembly. Below is all of the video that we have of that discussion, 2 clips in all, totaling 2 minutes.


Carson writes:

In an ideal world a locality would not have to be sued by its residents to follow state law. But, since we don't live in an ideal world and some localities believe they do not have to obey the law, sometimes it is necessary for the residents of these localities to take their own town or county to court to enforce the laws. In those cases, it seems reasonable that the ones who are breaking the rules should have to pay for the legal fees of those who take them to task for it.

Marvin writes:

Good bill. Applies a penalty to government (officials) that would violate state law.