There shall be no requirement that a sworn answer in a proceeding on an equitable claim be rebutted by the testimony of two witnesses.
§ 8.01-283.Answer in equity proceeding.
Chapter 7. Civil Actions; Commencement, Pleadings, and Motions · Article 3. Particular Equity Provisions · Last amended 2005 · Last verified July 16, 2026
In one sentenceVirginia no longer requires a plaintiff to produce the testimony of two witnesses, or one witness plus corroborating circumstances, to overcome a defendant’s sworn answer denying the claims in a case brought on an equitable claim, abolishing that old two-witness rule.
Full Text of § 8.01-283
Plain-English Summary
Old equity practice treated a sworn answer to a bill in equity as evidence in itself. If a defendant swore under oath that the plaintiff’s allegations were false, a court would not rule against him unless the plaintiff came back with the testimony of two witnesses, or one witness plus enough supporting circumstances to count as a second. Section 8.01-283 wipes that rule away.
Now a sworn answer carries no special evidentiary weight beyond what any other pleading or testimony would carry. A plaintiff can prevail with the proof he has — one credible witness, documents, or any combination the judge finds persuasive — without hunting for a second, corroborating source just because the defendant swore to his denial.
The change matters because the old two-witness rule often had little to do with the merits and more to do with counting heads. Dropping it lets equity claims turn on how convincing the evidence is, not on a rigid arithmetic of witnesses.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the two-witness rule that § 8.01-283 abolished?
Under older equity practice a defendant’s sworn answer denying the plaintiff’s claims could be overcome only by the testimony of two witnesses, or one witness supported by corroborating circumstances treated as equivalent to a second witness.
Does a sworn answer in an equity proceeding still carry special weight as evidence?
No. Section 8.01-283 states there is no requirement that a sworn answer be rebutted by the testimony of two witnesses, so a plaintiff’s proof is weighed like any other evidence rather than measured against that old standard.
Does this section apply to answers that are not given under oath?
The section addresses a “sworn answer” specifically, since the two-witness rule it eliminates applied only to answers given under oath.
Can a plaintiff still win an equity case with the testimony of just one witness?
Yes. Because § 8.01-283 removes the two-witness requirement, one witness’s testimony, together with whatever else the plaintiff offers, can be enough to rebut a sworn answer if the court finds it persuasive.
Is § 8.01-283 limited to a particular type of civil action?
It applies to “a proceeding on an equitable claim,” reflecting its place among Virginia’s particular equity provisions.
Amendment History
Code 1950, § 8-123; 1977, c. 617; 2005, c. 681.
Source & verification. Section text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Code of Virginia, published by the
Code of Virginia, Virginia Division of Legislative Automated Systems. Last verified July 16, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: virginia two-witness rule equityva code 8.01-283sworn answer equity proceeding virginiarebutting sworn answer in chancery virginiavirginia equity pleading evidence rule