In Brush Arbor Home Construction v. Alexander, the Supreme Court held that an arbitration clause which was otherwise gibberish had to be interpreted at least initially by an arbitrator, rather than by a Court, refusing to add a judicial limitation based on "impossibility" onto the language of the arbitration statutes.
In Com. v. Hall, the Supreme Court reversed the trial court's application of a forfeiture statute, Code § 19.2-386.22(A), refusing to add a judicial limitation onto the language of the statute based on the "substantiality" of the nexus between the property and the criminal activity.
In Mercer v. MacKinnon, the Supreme Court affirmed a dismissal based on lack of personal jurisdiction, refusing to add a judicial limitation on the meaning of the word "persistent" in Code § 8.01-328.1(A)(4).
In Reyes v. Com., the Supreme Court affirmed denial of a continuance under Code § 19.2-159.1(B), adding a judicial limitation onto the language of the statute requiring a continuance for defendants who no longer need court-appointed counsel.