Case law

Zaleski v. West Virginia Physicians' Mutual Insurance

220 W. Va. 311 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 27, 2007

The order recounted the lower court’s conclusions that [The] various provisions of the Physician’s Mutual Insurance Act clearly establish a close nexus between the State of West Virginia and the Physician’s Mutual Insurance … We addressed the issue of when an entity is considered a “state actor” in the context of governmental immunity in Hope Natural Gas Company v.

Thomas v. Town of Mason

26 L.R.A. 727 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 24, 1894

What is it, that we can take judicial notice of, that enables us to qualify or contradict these averments ? … And the establishment of our state and local boards of health is not to be regarded as detracting from the general powers of municipal government, unless such legislative intent clearly appears. 2 Beach, Mun.

State of West Virginia v. Bryson J. England, Jr.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 30, 2020

Buracker, 191 W.Va. 39, 443 S.E.2d 196 (1993), . . . only arises if it is first established that the testimony deals with “scientific knowledge.” … “Whether a witness is qualified to state an opinion is a matter which rests within the discretion of the trial court and its ruling on that point will not ordinarily be disturbed unless it clearly appears that its discretion

Sharon G. Legg v. Greenbrier County Schools

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 4, 2015

Legg is qualified for both placement in C and F, because she had an established cervical injury with pain rigidity associated with moderate to severe degenerative changes and a herniated disk thus yielding 7% impairment. … For the foregoing reasons, we find that the decision of the Board of Review is not in clear violation of any constitutional or statutory provision, nor is it clearly the result of erroneous conclusions of law, nor is it based

State of West Virginia ex rel. Heartland of Beckley WV, LLC v. West Virginia Bureau for Medical Services

West Virginia Supreme Court · May 14, 2021

Six of HCR’s seven facilities qualified as a “large” facility and one qualified as a “small” facility. … However, the administrative hearing officer explained the long- established concepts of the “law of the case” and the “mandate” of an appellate court, concepts whereby an appellate court’s opinion establishes the framework

Holstein v. Holstein

152 W. Va. 119 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 12, 1968

Robert was interrogated by the judge who determined that he was a good student and was qualified to testify. … We are cognizant of the well established principle that the exercise of discretion by the trial court in awarding the custody of minor children will not be disturbed on appeal unless it clearly appears that such discretion

Wilt v. State Automobile Mutual Insurance

203 W. Va. 165 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1998

practice clearly does not amount to fraud. … Notwithstanding this Court’s holding in CouHney, every claim which qualifies as a tort cannot necessarily be classified as a personal injury.

Dudley v. Niswander

65 W. Va. 461 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1909

Being of such strong character, deliberate admissions, clearly established, particularly those in writing, can only be explained or overthrown by convincing proof. … It is at least consonant with reason to say that when an admission in writing, especially in an instrument executed with the solemnity of seals, is clearly established against a party, he should not be permitted to contradict

State v. Wright

200 W. Va. 549 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 10, 1997

Double Jeopardy “The Double Jeopardy Clause in Article III, Section 5 of the West Virginia Constitution, provides immunity from further prosecution where a court having jurisdiction has acquitted the accused. … Wright alleges that the State failed to establish venue in Hampshire County.

State v. Brady

104 W. Va. 523 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 29, 1927

The rule seems to b'e that an expert need not have all the knowledge possible for one in his class, to entitle him to speak, but may testify unless it clearly appears that he is not qualified at all. … The question of his qualification to speak as an expert lies largely in the discretion of the trial court, whose judgment will not be reversed unless it clearly appears that the witness is not qualified. Savage v.

In Re: N.H.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 16, 2014

These findings shall not be set aside by a reviewing court unless clearly erroneous. … Further, he alleges that the circuit court clearly erred in reversing that finding at the dispositional hearing.

State ex rel. Erie Insurance Property & Casualty Co. v. Mazzone

218 W. Va. 593 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 30, 2005

Opinion work product “enjoys a nearly absolute immunity and can be discovered in only very rare and extraordinary circumstances.” … (“[I]t would certainly seem that reserve calculations by claims adjusters qualify as work product under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(3).

James E. Lockhart v. Blue Haven Energy

West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 12, 2015

Lockhart qualified 1 for the statutory presumption and granted Mr. Lockhart a 5% permanent partial disability award on a non-medical basis. Mr. … Lockhart has failed to establish he is entitled to more than a 10% permanent partial 2 disability award related to his occupational pneumoconiosis.

Hall v. Board of Educ. of County of Mingo

208 W. Va. 534 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 1, 2000

In this State, school service personnel seniority is established by statute. Therefore, we begin our analysis by reviewing the relevant statutes. … These statutes clearly illustrate the importance of seniority as it is viewed by the Legislature. We are equally aware of the importance of seniority in the careers of school service employees.

State v. Dunn

162 W. Va. 63 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 11, 1978

The photograph, once verified and made part of some qualified person’s testimony, becomes a nonverbal expression of the sponsoring witness upon whose foundation testimony its authenticity rests. *70 The other theory allows … Therefore, the trial court erred in deciding that the person who took the picture had to be there to establish a foundation for admissibility under that theory.

Hinchman v. Gillette

217 W. Va. 378 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 5, 2005

(c) Notwithstanding any provision of this code, if a claimant or his or her counsel, believes that no screening certificate of merit is necessary because the cause of action is based upon a well-established legal theory of … Under these facts, dismissal of the appellant’s suit, which was not clearly frivolous, was erroneous. 6 IV.

Miller v. Chesapeake & Ohio Ry Co.

93 W. Va. 257 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 6, 1923

Its natural course does not now clearly appear. … Now the defendant’s evidence very clearly establishes the fact that the center line of its right of way along there is the center line of its west bound track, which was the track first built.

Stephens v. Raleigh County Board of Education

163 W. Va. 434 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 16, 1979

In each of the cases below, proceedings were initiated in circuit court to establish the right to repurchase after that right had been denied at public sale. … The statutory language clearly indicates that it is the character of the entire community in which the property is located that will control the right to repurchase.

STATE EX REL. WEST VIRGINIA CITIZEN ACTION GROUP v. Tomblin

715 S.E.2d 36 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jan 18, 2011

Code § 3-10-2, the Legislature established the procedure to be followed regarding the holding of a new or special election for governor. … The procedure established in the second paragraph of W.

Lounsbury v. Lounsbury

170 W. Va. 723 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1982

sought by both the mother and father, the court must determine in the first instance whether the primary caretaker is a fit parent, and where the primary caretaker achieves the minimum, objective standard of behavior which qualifies … Syl. pt. 3, Garska, supra 1 In the final divorce order in the case before us the trial court found that the evidence failed to establish that either parent had “clearly taken primary responsibility for the caring and nurturing