Case law

Casto v. Dupuy

204 W. Va. 619 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1999

Thus, should the Castos be able to establish that M.A. & W. contracted with Mr. Dupuy to perform the inspection for the Castos’ sole benefit, privity of contract would exist in this ease. … Dupuy clearly present purported consequential continuing damages. In this case there is no showing of repetitious wrongful conduct. 12 .

Kominar v. HEALTH MGMT. ASSOCIATES OF WV

648 S.E.2d 48 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 28, 2007

But to some specific medical postmortem observation I think requires an expert that's trained and qualified in that particular field. And I didn't think the embalmer fit that. … According to the provisions of Rule 702, a witness may be qualified as an expert by "knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education." Id. (emphasis added). In Gentry v.

White v. White

64 W. Va. 30 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 3, 1908

All of them are uniform to the effect that the evidence of a parol gift must be direct and unequivocal and sufficient to clearly prove the contract, the subject matter of the gift, the land, clearly identified, the possession … All the declarations of the ancestor, to which the witnesses in this cause have testified, are susceptible of a qualified meaning.

State Ex Rel. Lippert v. Sims

143 W. Va. 542 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 27, 1958

At the risk of verbosity, these will be quoted in full: *546 Preamble: “In order to promote an efficient and economical administration and in order to provide equal opportunity for all qualified persons to compete for positions … This proceeding is clearly distinguishable from State ex rel. Board of Governors of West Virginia University v. Sims, 140 W. Va. 64 , 82 S. E. 2d. 321.

Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Maynard

190 W. Va. 113 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 28, 1993

Bronson, 167 W.Va. 35, 41 , 277 S.E.2d 718, 722 (1981) (“[t]he right to prohibition must clearly appear”); State v. … required at which the plaintiff must establish personal jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence.”

State Ex Rel. Atkins v. Burnside

212 W. Va. 74 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 27, 2002

This Court reasoned: Many of the factors that have been suggested as supporting a reverse bifurcated trial procedure, such as clearly established liability that would make a second phase of the trial unlikely, demonstrated … In their Complaints, the plaintiffs have alleged, without any specific detail, “systemic poisoning” of the plaintiffs’ “immune, muscu-loskeletal, and neurological systems and all of their organs.”

Black's Auto Repair & Towing, Inc. v. Monongalia County Magistrate Court

211 W. Va. 661 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 2, 2002

Muncy was clearly not intransigent regarding his appearance in court; he was incapable of fully responding to the complaint because of his incarceration. … If a person under any disability does not have a duly qualified representative he may sue by his next friend.

State Ex Rel. West Virginia Citizens Action Group v. West Virginia Economic Development Grant Committee

213 W. Va. 255 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 16, 2003

Based on a new definition of persons qualifying for housing assistance, we were asked in Waterhouse to determine whether the Legislature had failed to provide proper guidance for identifying which persons qualified for housing … Development Project Fund, “although not denominated a special fund, clearly is one.”

In re H.D.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 2, 2023

As of the date of the report, A.T. was in a 60-day rehabilitation program, which she maintains she mistakenly believed qualified as long-term rehabilitation. … Indeed, we have stated that, in abuse and neglect matters, a circuit court’s findings of fact may “not be set aside . . . unless clearly erroneous” and that a finding is not “clearly erroneous” unless, “although there is

Nathan S. v. Tom Harlan, Interim Superintendent

West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 23, 2020

Following trial, the State filed a recidivist information against petitioner alleging he was previously convicted of two qualifying felony offenses, both of which were driving under the influence, third offense. … Va. 3, 459 S.E.2d 114 (1995): In the West Virginia courts, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are to be governed by the two-pronged test established in Strickland v.

Ohio Fuel Oil Co. v. Greenleaf

84 W. Va. 67 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 29, 1919

It is not very material who is correct about this transaction inasmuch as it clearly appears that each side clearly understood the other’s contention, the plaintiff’s contention being that it had a right to continue operations … , say the qualifying clause ‘as oil or gas is produced’ really means ‘as long as the premises are diligently and efficiently operated, provided minerals shall have been discovered within the fixed term?’

Reginald S. Grimmett v. William D. and Kerry L. Smith

238 W. Va. 54 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 12, 2016

While the parties refer to Terry Smith as an expert witness, the trial transcript does not reflect that he was qualified as an expert at trial. 5 swim in the pond. … Thereafter, the Smiths filed their motion for a new trial, arguing the jury’s verdict was against the weight of the evidence and clearly wrong.

Walls v. McKinney

139 W. Va. 866 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 18, 1954

We find nothing in this record which shows clearly that the plaintiff was an independent contractor. … The circumstances of his employment and the payment on an hourly and trip basis for his labor are not sufficient to clearly establish the relationship of independent contractor.

Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Lamb

117 W. Va. 306 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 25, 1936

Litz, Judge: This is a suit to establish a preference against an insolvent bank. … A holding that would be followed by such disastrous consequences to other persons must not be made unless the justification therefor is clearly established.”

Huffman v. Goals Coal Co.

223 W. Va. 724 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 9, 2009

Code § 29A-5-4(a) and reviews questions of law presented de novo; findings of fact by the administrative officer are accorded deference unless the reviewing court believes the findings to be clearly wrong.”); Syllabus Point … It is the duty of the legislature to consider facts, establish policy, and embody that policy in legislation.

Stanton v. Ruthbell Coal Co.

127 W. Va. 685 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 29, 1945

Ed. 303 , the same Court held that an action by an employee of the Director General for personal injuries, sustained in the operation of a railroad under Federal control, is against the United States, and the sovereign immunity … from suit is waived only to the extent clearly indicated by the Federal Control Act and the Orders of the Director General.

Kevin Goodman, Jr. v. Shelby Searls, Superintendent, Huttonsville Correctional Center

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 8, 2022

“In the West Virginia courts, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are to be governed by the two-pronged test established in Strickland v. … Goodman focuses on one still frame photo taken from one of the toll booth videos that he believes most clearly depicts that “as [Ms.

Steven W. Funt v. Donnie Ames, Superintendent, Mt. Olive Correctional Complex

West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 20, 2022

In addressing that contention, the circuit court found that that line of questioning was to establish the circumstances of break-ins that led Mr. … “Furthermore, the proof which established [p]etitioner’s guilt was strong.

Sheetz, Inc. v. Bowles Rice McDavid Graff & Love, PLLC

209 W. Va. 318 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 27, 2001

clearly are. … Vandevender clearly violated West Virginia law.

Brumfield v. Board of Education

121 W. Va. 725 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1939

The petition alleges that Brumfield qualified as a board member on July 6, 1937, and served until January 3, 1939; that Vin-cen’s claimed appointment in lieu of Brumfield was voidable, if not void; that at a regular meeting … How, then, can we say that a clear legal right has been established where the evidence, as in the instant case, is, at the most contradictory? The record here does not lend itself to such a conclusion.