1. Definition

The games prohibited by statute and all unlawful gaming, may be divided into two classes. To the first class belong the games wherein the chances are equal. To the second class belong the games wherein the chances are unequal, all other things being equal, and those unequal chances are in favor of the keeper or exhibitor of the game. Commonwealth v. Wyatt, 27 Va. (6 Rand.) 694 (1828); State v. Gaughan, 48 S.E. 210, 212 (Va. 1904).

To constitute "gaming" within the meaning of Va. Code Ann. § 18-284, it must be proved that there was betting or wagering of money or something of value upon the result of some game or upon the happening of some event. Va. Code Ann. § 18-289 makes the offense of "gaming" as provided in the two preceding sections complete without proof of betting or wagering. Layne v. Commonwealth, 84 S.E.2d 507, 509 (Va. 1954).

The aim of Va. Code Ann. § 18-284 is to discourage gaming in its inception and its violation depends upon whether the accused kept or exhibited any table used for the purpose of gaming. This statute provides for an offense distinct and separate from that of merely participating as a player, Va. Code Ann. § 18-278, or that of knowingly permitting one's premises to be used for gaming, Va. Code Ann. § 18-285. Layne, 84 S.E.2d at 510.

Illegal gambling" means the making, placing or receipt, of any bet or wager in this Commonwealth of money or other thing of value, made in exchange for a chance to win a prize, stake or other consideration or thing of value, dependent upon the result of any game, contest or any other event the outcome of which is uncertain or a matter of chance, whether such game, contest or event, occurs or is to occur inside or outside the limits of this Commonwealth. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-325.

Gambling that “calls into play the rule of construction that statutes relating to the same subject should be read and construed together.” Turner v. Commonwealth, 309 S.E.2d 337, 339 (Va. 1983). Federal decisions upon statutes not identical to the gambling statutes in Virginia cannot control the plain and unambiguous terms of Virginia law. Id. at 340.

Mere gaming is not, at common law, an offense, but is made so only by statute. Commonwealth v. Richards, 3 Va. (1 Va. Cas.) 133 (1803); Both states have numerous statutory prohibitions which are considered in detail in the following sections. Va. Code Ann. §§ 18.2-325 to 18.2-340 (1950).

2. Dominant factor

Nature of game as determined by its intrinsic character and the average skill of its players, whether a game is one of chance or skill or mixed chance and skill must be determined from its character and the method in which it is played and not by the name that it is called. United States v. Casion (1917) 37 Philippine 36; Gaughan, 48 S.E. 212 (W. Va. 1904).

The essentials of a lottery are consideration, prize and chance. The essential elements are the distribution of money or property; chance; and a valuable consideration paid, or agreed to be paid, for the chance. The name of the enterprise is called is immaterial. Maughs v. Porter, 161 S.E. 242, 245 (Va. 1931).

3. Material element

Where the expectancy of hitting the lottery jackpot was not just the material cause but the sole cause of the agreement, and the whole reason for entering into the agreement was to pool funds so that each player could increase his chances of winning money in the lottery, the agreement constituted a gaming contract Hughes v. Cole, 465 S.E.2d 820, 827 (Va. 1996).

Evidence which showed only that defendant, who was manager and bookkeeper of a filling station at which the police discovered a crap game, was participating in the game with others, no witness testifying that he asserted or exercised any control over the game or table, was not sufficient to support his conviction under section 18-284. Layne, 84 S.E.2d at 508.

4. “Any” chance

The games prohibited by statute, and indeed all unlawful gaming, may be divided into two classes. To the first class belong the games wherein the chances are equal. To the second class belong the games wherein the chances are unequal, all other things being equal, and those unequal chances are in favor of the keeper or exhibitor of the game. Wyatt, 27 Va. (6 Rand.) at 694; Gaughan, 48 S.E. at 212.

Games of chance are of but two kinds or classes. The first is where the chances are equal, all other things being equal. The second is where all things being equal the chances are nevertheless unequal, that is, in favor of one side. Wyatt, 27 Va. (6 Rand.) at 694.

Bet" Defined. A "bet" is a wager between two or more persons. It involves a concurrence of wills, i.e., there must be an offer to bet made on one side and accepted on the other. “When the offer is accepted, and not before, the betting becomes complete.” Lescallet v. Commonwealth, 17 S.E. 546, 547 (Va. 1893).  It is true that a bet does imply risk, but it does not necessarily imply risk in both parties. There must be between them a chance of gain and a chance of loss, but it does not follow that each of the parties to the bet must have both these chances. If from the terms of the engagement one of the parties may gain but cannot lose, and the other may lose but cannot gain, and there must be either a gain by the one or a loss by the other according to the happening of the contingency, it is as much a bet or wager as if the parties had shared equally the chances of gain and of loss. . . . One person alone cannot be guilty of the offense of betting. There must be always at least two parties engaged in it. It is a joint act; and when the chance of gain and the chance of loss are created, it matters not how those chances are distributed between the parties: there exists all that is necessary to constitute a bet. Shumate v. Commonwealth, 56 Va. (15 Gratt.) 653 (1860).

Under the present Virginia statute it is not illegal to participate in a game of chance conducted in a private residence if such residence is not commonly used for such games of chance and there is no "operator," Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-334 which is defined as "any person, firm or association of persons, who conducts, finances, manages, supervises, directs or owns all or part of an illegal gambling enterprise, activity or operation." Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-325(3). The present Virginia gambling statutes make no other reference to public or private places.

It was observed in Wyatt 27 Va. (6 Rand.) at 694, that the well-known gambling game of E.O. was a game of chance in which the chances are unequal in favor of the exhibitor of the game or table.

The "free plays" awarded by a multiple coin pinball machine are a prize because they have some value to the player either in playing additional games without charge or receiving a "payoff," and where "free plays" are won predominantly by chance rather than skill for a consideration by virtue of the coins placed in the machine, it is a lottery per se. State v. Wassick, 191 S.E.2d 283 (W. Va. 1972).

“Sale, and possession of evidence of sale, of chances are necessary parts of the operation and conduct of the numbers game. But it does not follow that every sale, transfer, or instance of possession for the purpose of sale, of a chance constitutes operation and conduct of the game.” Bryson v. Commonwealth, 175 S.E.2d 248, 252 (Va. 1970) (internal quotations omitted). The purchaser of a numbers chance is not guilty of a felony, but is guilty only of a misdemeanor. Id.

5. Exemptions

The Virginia Code, Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-325 declared all gambling activities illegal and subject to criminal sanctions, excepting, however, certain sporting events (§ 18.2-333), games of chance conducted in a private residence (§ 18.2-334), and bingo games and raffles conducted by certain organizations (§ 18.2-334.2). Kennedy v. Annandale Boys Club, Inc., 272 S.E.2d 38, 40 (Va. 1980).

Virginia does not have any statutory authority, attorney general opinions, or case law defining bookmaking.

The Virginia statutes make no reference to specific types of games that are illegal, but use terms such as "gambling device," "illegal gambling" or "illegal gambling operation" to define the acts made illegal under the statutes. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-325  (2006).

Under the Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-325  "Gambling device" includes:
1. Any device, machine, paraphernalia, equipment, or other thing, including books, records and other papers, which are actually used in an illegal gambling operation or activity, and
2. Any machine, apparatus, implement, instrument, contrivance, board or other thing, including but not limited to those dependent upon the insertion of a coin or other object for their operation, which operates, either completely automatically or with the aid of some physical act by the player or operator, in such a manner that, depending upon elements of chance, it may eject something of value or determine the prize or other thing of value to which the player is entitled; provided, however, that the return to the user of nothing more than additional chances or the right to use such machine is not deemed something of value within the meaning of this subsection; and provided further, that machines that only sell, or entitle the user to, items of merchandise of equivalent value that may differ from each other in composition, size, shape or color, shall not be deemed gambling devices within the meaning of this subsection. Such devices are no less gambling devices if they indicate beforehand the definite result of one or more operations but not all the operations. Nor are they any less a gambling device because, apart from their use or adaptability as such, they may also sell or deliver something of value on a basis other than chance. Turner, 309 S.E.2d at 337. The words "all or part of" in Code § 18.2-325(3) mean playing a partial leadership role. Id.

The game of bagatelle was within the meaning of the statutes making it unlawful for any person to bet at any game except bowls, etc., at any ordinary, race field or other public place. Neal v. Commonwealth, 63 Va. (22 Gratt.) 917 (1872).

While the General Assembly approved the operation of bingo games and the playing of the games under certain controlled conditions, it did not make available the state's legal machinery necessary to enforce gaming contracts. On the contrary, it expressly withheld the right to enforce a gaming contract by a civil action. . Kennedy, 272 S.E.2d at 39.

The Virginia Code defines "Jackpot" to mean a bingo card played as part of a bingo game, as defined, in which all numbers on the card are covered, each number being selected at random, and with no free or "wild" numbers. Single, double and triple bingo lines do not satisfy this definition. Regular Veterans Ass'n v. Commonwealth, 446 S.E.2d 621, 623 (Va. Ct. App. 1994). Therefore, prizes awarded for those accomplishments are not "jackpot" prizes. Only prizes awarded for success at "coverall" qualify as "jackpot" prizes. Id. An "averaging situation" does not satisfy the definition in the Virginia Code. If the total prizes awarded in the game equal or exceed the gross receipts from the sale of cards, those prizes will accomplish the repayment of all the gross receipts as prize money back to the players, and that game will fall within the exemption of the statute.4 However, if the total prizes paid for a game are less than the gross receipts from card sales for that game, that game does not fall within the exemption of the statute, and any jackpot prize awarded in that game must be included in computing total jackpot prizes for the purposes of the Virginia Code. Id. at 624.

Slot Machines. A slot machine operated by the player depositing a nickel or token and then turning a crank, whereupon the machine automatically paid a reward which always contained a package of mint of the retail value of five cents and sometimes in addition thereto one or more tokens which could be used in playing the machine, was a gambling device within the meaning of the former Virginia statute against slot machines. Though by means of an indicator the player was informed as to what the machine paid before each play, there was no method of knowing what the reward would be as to subsequent plays. Ferris v. Jones, 13 Va. L. Reg. (n.s.) 235 (1927).

Virginia does not have any statutory authority, attorney general opinions, or case law regarding “Bucket Shop Laws.”

Any participant who, for the purpose of competing for any such purse, stake or premium offered in any such contest, knowingly and fraudulently enters any contestant other than the contestant purported to be entered or knowingly and fraudulently enters a contestant in a class in which it does not belong, shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor.

Its intrinsic character and the average skill of its players determine the nature of a game. It has been pointed out that whether a game is one of chance or skill (also, it would seem, one of mixed chance and skill) must be determined from its character and the method in which it is played and not by the name that it is called. United States v. Casion, (1917) 37 Philippine 36; Gaughan 48 S.E. at 212.

  The "free plays" awarded by a multiple coin pinball machine are a prize because they have some value to the player either in playing additional games without charge or receiving a "payoff," and where "free plays" are won predominantly by chance rather than skill for a consideration by virtue of the coins placed in the machine, it is a lottery per se. Wassick, 191 S.E.2d at 283. In Lacey v Palmer, 24 S.E. 930 (Va. 1896), the court held that an act to prevent pool selling did not violate a state constitutional prohibition against a law embracing more than one subject. The statute declared that it was unlawful for any person or persons, or association of persons, corporation or corporations by any ways, means, or devices to make any bet or wager, or receive or record or register, or forward or purport or pretend to forward any money, thing, or consideration of value to be bet or wagered on the result of any trial of speed or power of endurance or skill of animals or beasts that was to take place beyond the limits of the commonwealth, or by any ways, means, or devices to aid, assist, or abet in making any bet or wager, or the receiving, recording, or registering, or forwarding or purporting or pretending to forward any money, thing, or consideration of value to be bet or wagered on the result of any trial of speed or power of endurance or skill of animals or beasts that was to take place beyond the limits of the commonwealth, or to aid or assist or abet in any way or in any manner in any of the forbidden acts. Id. at 931.

The numbers game is a lottery, and the sale of slips, possession of duplicate slips, and collection and delivery of them and the money are necessary steps in the operation of the venture. Each step constitutes aid in its conduct. Quidley v. Commonwealth, 59 S.E.2d 52 (Va. 1950).

The operation of a "numbers game" falls within the prohibition of Code, § 18-301, which forbids the operation of a lottery. Id; Roy v. Commonwealth, 62 S.E.2d 902 (Va. 1951). Parr v. Commonwealth, 96 S.E.2d 160, 163-64 (Va. 1957) Our conclusion is that while the conduct of a "numbers game" is contrary to the public policy of this State and our standard of morals, it is not per se immoral or inherently evil and does not involve moral  turpitude. Id. at 163-65.

1. Poker/card games

Virginia does not have any statutory authority, attorney general opinions, or case law regarding poker games

2. Games using dice

Virginia does not have any statutory authority, attorney general opinions, or case law regarding games using dice.

3. Billiards

Virginia does not have any statutory authority, attorney general opinions, or case law regarding billiards.

4. Bowling

Virginia does not have any statutory authority, attorney general opinions, or case law regarding bowling games.

5. Darts

Virginia does not have any statutory authority, attorney general opinions, or case law regarding dart games.

1. Social gaming

The Virginia Code, Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-325 declared all gambling activities illegal and subject to criminal sanctions, excepting, however, certain sporting events (§ 18.2-333), games of chance conducted in a private residence (§ 18.2-334), and bingo games and raffles conducted by certain organizations (§ 18.2-334.2). Kennedy, 272 S.E.2d at 40.

2. Charity gaming

"Charitable gaming" or "charitable games" means those raffles and games of chance explicitly authorized by this article. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-340.16 According to Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-340.15  (2006), the state controls charitable gaming. Charitable gaming is permitted as a means of funding qualified organizations but must be conducted only in strict compliance with the provisions of this article. Id.

The Department of Charitable Gaming is vested with control of all charitable gaming in Virginia. The Charitable Gaming Board shall have the power to prescribe regulations and conditions under which such gaming shall be conducted to ensure that it is conducted in a manner consistent with the purpose for which it is permitted. Id.

The conduct of any charitable gaming is a privilege that may be granted or denied by the Department of Charitable Gaming or its duly authorized representatives in its discretion in order to effectuate the purposes set forth in this article. Id. The Virginia code provide that the money, tables and devices may be seized; the money forfeited and the tables or devices disposed of, destroyed or may be awarded to a charitable institution. Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-386.30  (2006).

3. Chucky Cheese Gaming exemptions

Virginia does not have any statutory authority, attorney general opinions, or case law granting a chucky cheese exemption.

4. Commercial gaming

Virginia does not have any statutory authority, attorney general opinions, or case law granting a commercial gaming exception.

5. Lottery

The essentials of a lottery are consideration, prize and chance. The essential elements are the distribution of money or property; chance; and a valuable consideration paid, or agreed to be paid, for the chance. What the name of the enterprise is called is immaterial. . Maughs, 161 S.E. at 245.

The test of a lottery requires three essential elements; namely consideration, prize and chance. Each element must act with the others as integral parts of a unit, since one will not suffice without the other. 18 Va. L. Rev. 465. There is an element of chance in every business, but if the inducement is the lure of an uncertain prize, then the business is a lottery, 26 Va. L. Rev. 791.  As to the element of consideration, Maughs, 161 S.E. at 245, held that there was a lottery where an auctioneer promised a new automobile to the person whose name was drawn at an auction from a box containing the names of all white persons over sixteen years of age who attended the auction, regardless of whether they made bids or purchased anything.

  Among the schemes that courts consider lotteries is the "numbers game," Roy, 62 S.E.2d at 902. Offers to give away prizes to holders of tickets drawn at an auction, Maughs, 161 S.E. at 242, or something equivalent. Commonwealth v. Chubb, 26 Va. (5 Rand.) 715 (1827).   While in common manner of speaking the word lottery may mean a game, yet the Virginia General Assembly has clearly drawn a distinction between lotteries and unlawful gaming. Temple v. Commonwealth, 75 Va. 892 (1881).   An agreement to give a prize to a person attending an auction, the winner to be determined by chance, is a lottery, against public policy and unenforceable. Maughs 161 S.E. at 242. In this State gambling, keeping a gambling house, and the operation of a lottery are mala prohibita. Section 60 of our Constitution provides: "No lottery shall hereafter be authorized by law; and the buying, selling, or transferring of tickets or chances in any lottery shall be prohibited." Parr, 198 Va. at 725.

6. Horseracing/greyhound racing

In Virginia, horseracing in itself is not prohibited, but the betting or gaming on such races and the making, writing and selling of books or pools on horseracing is prohibited. Va. Code Ann. §§ 18.2-325, 18.2-329, 18.2-330, 18.2-333. Furthermore, selling pools on races outside the state is also prohibited. § 18.2-325   The State of Virginia has authority, by statute, to forbid citizens to bet on horseracing in another state, and this prohibition is not affected by the fact that the money is to be placed in a third state. The act forbidden is the wager, and over it and the actors in it, the state has complete jurisdiction. It is immaterial where the race takes place. Lacey, 24 S.E. at 930. The objective of the statute is to suppress gambling and not to regulate interstate commerce, though it may by the way affect commerce. So, it is within the police power and does not contravene the Constitution of the United States. Id.

Virginia enacted the Horse Racing Act in 1988 to allow horseracing with pari-mutuel betting in Virginia. Virginia Jockey Club, Inc. v. Virginia Racing Comm'n, 469 S.E.2d 70, 72 (Va.Ct. App. 1996).

As part of the legislation, the General Assembly created a racing commission and vested it with control of all horseracing with pari-mutuel wagering in Virginia, and with full and complete power to set regulations and conditions under which such racing and wagering must be conducted, so as to maintain in such racing complete honesty and integrity. Id.

The act provides that no person can construct, establish or own a horse racetrack or similar facility where pari-mutuel wagering is permitted without receiving an owner's license from the commission, and that no person can operate pari-mutuel wagering or conduct any race meeting at which wagering is permitted without first obtaining an operator's license from the commission. Id. The code provisions that govern the licensing of owners and operators of horseracing tracks with pari-mutuel betting address two primary public policy concerns:

First, the legislation emphasized protecting the honesty and integrity of horseracing in Virginia and, second, the legislation was designed to ensure that horseracing is conducted on a sound financial basis, according to accepted business and management practices, in order to promote the success and growth of the horseracing industry in Virginia Jockey Club, Inc., 469 S.E.2d at 70.

7. Other pari-mutuel

Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-364  (2006), controls acing with pari-mutuel wagering. Here, licensed horseracing with pari-mutuel wagering shall be permitted The Virginia Racing Commission is vested with control of all horseracing with pari-mutuel wagering in the Virginia, with complete power to prescribe regulations and conditions under which such racing and wagering shall be conducted.
B. The conduct of any horseracing with pari-mutuel wagering participation in such racing or wagering and entrance to any place where such racing or wagering is conducted is a privilege which may be granted or denied by the Commission.
C. The award of any prize money for any pari-mutuel wager placed at a racetrack or similar facility licensed by the Commission shall not be deemed to be a part of any gaming contract within the purview of § 11-14.

Virginia does not have any statutory authority, attorney general opinions, or case law regarding internet gaming.

Penalty for illegal gambling are as follows any person who illegally gambles or engages in interstate gambling as defined in Va. Code Ann. §18.2-325 shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor. If an association or pools of persons illegally gamble, each person therein shall be guilty of illegal gambling Va. Code Ann. §18.2-326

If any person while gambling cheats or by fraudulent means wins money or any other valuable thing, he shall be fined not less than five nor more than ten times the value of such winnings. This penalty shall be in addition to any other penalty imposed under this article. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-327.

The operator of an illegal gambling enterprise, activity or operation shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. Unless you fit the specified requirements. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-328.

If the owner, lessee, tenant, occupant or other person in control of any place or conveyance, knows, or reasonably should know, that it is being used for illegal gambling, and permits such gambling to continue without having notified a law-enforcement officer of the presence of such illegal gambling activity, he shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-329.

Any person, firm or association of persons, other than those persons specified in other sections of this article, who knowingly aids, abets or assists in the operation of an illegal gambling enterprise, activity or operation, shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-330.

A person is guilty of illegal possession of a gambling device when he manufactures, or possesses, or conducts transaction designed to affect ownership or use of any gambling device, believing or having reason to believe that the same is to be used in the advancement of unlawful gambling activity. Violation of any provision of this section shall constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-331.

Certain acts not deemed "consideration" in some prosecution. For example no consideration shall be deemed to have passed or been given because of any person's attendance upon the premises of another; his execution, mailing or delivery of an entry blank; his answering of questions, verbally or in writing; his witnessing of a demonstration or other proceeding; or any one or more thereof, where no charge is made to, paid by, or any purchase required of him in connection therewith Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-332

1. Player versus operator

Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-325 defines the word "operator," a term crucial to the offense defined in Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-328, as including any person, firm or association of persons, who conducts, finances, manages, supervises, directs or owns all or part of an illegal gambling enterprise, activity or operation. The words "all or part of" in Code § 18.2-325(3) mean playing a partial leadership role. Turner, 309 S.E.2d. at 339. In Turner, adopts the rule that an 'operator' of an illegal gambling enterprise is one who leads and controls the enterprise as distinguished from one who merely engages or participates in it. Id.

In Walton v. Commonwealth, in order to bring defendant within the realm of this section it was not necessary to show that he was the only person in charge. The statute was intended to bring within its sweep a co-commander, co-leader, or co-manager; moreover, where there is proof that a defendant played even a partial leadership role in the illegal gambling enterprise then he can be convicted under this section. Walton v. Commonwealth, No. 0388-85 1986 WL 400475, at *1 (Va. Ct. App. Nov. 12, 1986); Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-328 (2006).

Bagman" in numbers operation held not to be an "operator." Turner, 309 S.E.2d at 337.

The operator of an illegal gambling enterprise, activity or operation shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. However, any such operator who engages in an illegal gambling operation which (i) has been or remains in substantially continuous operation for a period in excess of thirty days or (ii) has gross revenue of $ 2,000 or more in any single day shall be fined not more than $ 20,000 and imprisoned not less than one year nor more than ten years. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-328 (2006).

2. Misdemeanor versus felony

The purchaser of a numbers chance is not guilty of a felony, but is guilty only of a misdemeanor. Bryson, 175 S.E.2d at 252. In Virginia, any person who illegally gambles is guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-326 (2006). Persons who operate an illegal gambling enterprise are guilty of a Class 6 felony. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-328 (2006). Possession of a gambling device constitutes a Class 1 misdemeanor. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-331 (2006).

3. Gaming Crimes

18.2-340.  County ordinances prohibiting illegal gambling  The governing body of any county may adopt ordinances prohibiting illegal gambling and other illegal activity related thereto, including provision for forfeiture proceedings in the name of the county. Such ordinances shall not conflict with the provisions of this article or with other state laws and any penalties provided for violation of such ordinances shall not exceed a fine of $ 2,500 or confinement in jail for twelve months, either or both. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-340. To convict under this section, the Commonwealth need only prove that the defendant operated an illegal gambling enterprise, activity or operation. Dingus v. Commonwealth, 477 S.E.2d 303 (Va. Ct. App. 1996).

Accessories to Gambling Activity. In Virginia, if any person, firm or association of persons knowingly aids, abets or assists in the operation of an illegal gambling activity, such person or persons is guilty of a class one misdemeanor

In Virginia any person who illegally gambles is guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-326 (2006). Persons who operate an illegal gambling enterprise are guilty of a Class 6 felony. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-328 (2006). Possession of a gambling device constitutes a Class 1 misdemeanor. Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-331 (2006).

It is an offense to keep or exhibit, for the purpose of gaming, any gaming table or bank of any name or description whatever or any table or bank used for gaming that has no name. The words "keep or exhibit" as used in Va. Code Ann. § 18-284 have no technical meaning but simply mean to maintain, control, or display. The display or maintenance of a table for the purpose of gaming by one having authority and exercising control over it constitutes a keeping and exhibiting within the meaning of the statute. It is immaterial therefore whether a particular table is specially constructed or designed for the purpose of playing the game called "craps" or any other game for money or property, so long as it is used for the purpose of gaming. Layne, 84 S.E.2d at 509.

The validity of the first part of the Statute of Anne, voiding all gambling contracts, clearly continues in Virginia. One court has suggested that the debtor recovery provision may also be operative. A gambling contract is void under Virginia law; it is a complete nullity, one that has no legal force or binding effect. Further, it is one that never had any legal existence or effect and one, which cannot in any manner, have life breathed into it. Rahmani v. Resorts Int'l Hotel, Inc., 20 F. Supp. 2d 932, 936 n.6 (E.D. Va. 1998).

As gambling contracts are illegal or immoral, Virginia law simply leaves the litigants in the plight in which they have seen fit to place themselves without undertaking to balance benefits or burdens, and a party to such contracts cannot sue for rescission or restitution. Id. at 936.

Notes given for gambling losses are invalid, even in the hands of a holder in due course. Glassman v. FDIC, 173 S.E.2d 843 (Va. 1970).  Enforcement of a note executed in order to pay a gambling debt incurred in another state would be against the express public policy and positive law of the Commonwealth. Resorts Int'l Hotel, Inc. v. Agresta, 569 F. Supp. 24, 26 (E.D. Va. 1983), aff'd, 725 F.2d 676 (4th Cir. 1984).

1. Gaming Contracts

Under the Va. Code Ann. § 11-14  (2006), all gaming contracts are void. All wagers, conveyances, assurances, and all contracts and securities that was consideration is money or other valuable thing won or bet, at any game, horse race, sport or pastime, and all contracts to repay any money knowingly lent at the time and place of such game, race, sport or pastime, to any person for the purpose of so gaming, betting, or wagering, or to repay any money so lent to any person who shall, at such time and place, so pay, bet or wager, shall be utterly void. Under § 11-14, the Virginia code provide that the money, tables and devices may be seized; the money forfeited and the tables or devices disposed of, destroyed or may be awarded to a charitable institution. Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-386.30  (2006)

Virginia does not have any statutory authority, attorney general opinions, or case law granting authority for commercial casino gaming.