Objective: The Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT) is one of the most accurate performance validity tests (PVTs). Previous research has recommended a variety of cutoffs for performance invalidity classification on the VSVT. To date, only one of these studies has used a known groups design and no study has investigated these cutoffs in an exclusively mild traumatic brain injury medico-legal sample. The current study used a known groups design to validate VSVT cutoffs among mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) litigants and to explore the best approach for using the multiple recommended cutoffs for this test. Method: Archival analysis of 92 mTBI litigants was conducted. Examinees were classified as performance invalid if they failed at least 2 out of 5 criterion PVTs; all other examinees were classified as performance valid. Analyses explored the classification accuracy of both items correct- and response latency-based cutoffs, and the impact of using multiple VSVT cutoffs in conjunction. Results: Analyses documented several cutoffs with adequate classification accuracy. Cutoffs of <18 Hard items correct, <41 Total items correct, an Easy – Hard items correct difference >6, and <5 items correct on any block yielded the strongest classification accuracy. Using multiple cutoffs in conjunction reduced classification accuracy, indicating that only a single, strong cutoff from the VSVT should be used. Conclusion: Given the convergence of results across studies, a cutoff of <18 Hard items correct is the most appropriate for clinical implementation with mild traumatic brain injury litigants.