Case law

Patricia S. Reed, Commissioner, W. Va. DMV v. Robert B. Conniff

236 W. Va. 300 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 4, 2015

The DMV’s statutory duty to procure the officer’s attendance at a hearing is not immune to human error. … Recognizing perhaps that its continual mishandling of this case and extraordinary delay yields it little favor, the DMV counters simply that there has been no real prejudice established by Conniff.

Leslie Equipment Co. v. Wood Resources Co.

224 W. Va. 530 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 30, 2009

Where, however, “the issue on appeal from the circuit court is clearly a question of law ..., we apply a de novo standard of review.” Syl. Pt. 1, in part, *533 Chrystal R.M. v. … They are required to *537 establish that they sought to vacate the default judgment within a reasonable time. See Evans, 193 W.Va. at 587 , 457 S.E.2d at 524 .

Wayne L. Evans v. Bluefield Hospital Company

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 16, 2018

This Court has long held that “[t]he true test as to whether a juror is qualified to serve on the panel is whether without bias or prejudice he can render a verdict solely on the evidence under the instructions of the court … He contends that there was ample testimony that established that one or both respondents violated the standard of care so the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.

Burnside v. Burnside

194 W. Va. 263 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 31, 1995

Most statements offered by one spouse against the other will, if relevant, qualify as a party admission under Rule 801(d)(2) of the West Virginia Rules of Evidence. … Code, 48-3-10, is limited to conveyances where the title is placed only in the name of the other spouse is inconsistent with well established precedent.

William James Sons Co. v. Hutchinson

79 W. Va. 389 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1916

Clearly, the notice so prescribed is a prerequisite to the exercise of that right. … Clearly, no forfeiture of the Granger title has occurred since it passed to the Jameses.

McDaniel v. Coogle

100 W. Va. 381 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 10, 1925

It is con•tended that she was not shown to have had sufficient knowledge of property values generally to qualify her as a witness on the subject. … Defendant’s Instruction No. 6, alleged to have been refused, states that the mutual promise to marry must be established by a preponderance of the evidence.

Brammer v. Taylor

175 W. Va. 728 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1985

As discussed below, merely typing another person’s will or attempted will is clearly not practicing law. … There is no allegation that defendant represented that he was an attorney or qualified to draw the will.

Warner v. Wingfield

224 W. Va. 277 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 3, 2009

that these claims or defenses increase delay or divert attention from valid claims or defenses asserted in good faith, they serve to deny the very access to the judicial system they would claim as justification for their immunity … The court must explain its reasons clearly on the record if it decides a sanction is appropriate.

State v. Voters

134 W. Va. 690 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 3, 1950

Va. 74 , that: “The provision in the Constitution of this State, (Art. 6, sec., 30) that no law shall embrace more than one object, as qualified by the provision in the same section, that if any object shall be embraced in … Summers, and the taking of the dog' by the defendant are all clearly established, as is the fact that the dog was in the possession of the defendant from the time he first took possession thereof to the time' he returned

Preussag International Steel Corp. v. March-Westin Co.

221 W. Va. 472 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 9, 2007

One line requires that work must be done at the construction site for a party to qualify as a subcontractor. … Expert testimony established that Northwestern’s work on the project constituted a substantial share of the construction of the department store.

Dwayne Cales v. Town of Meadow Bridge

239 W. Va. 288 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 30, 2017

“‘Where the issue on an appeal from the circuit court is clearly a question of law or involving an interpretation of a statute, we apply a de novo standard of review.’ Syllabus point 1, Chrystal R.M. v. … “Where the issue on an appeal from the circuit court is clearly a question of law or involving an interpretation of a statute, we apply a de novo standard of review.” Syl. pt. 1, Chrystal R.M. v.

In re the Adoption of James Nicholas C.

219 W. Va. 729 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 13, 2006

Jamison’s physical, mental, medical, and emotional disabilities qualify him as a special needs child as defined in Section 473(c) of the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980, ( Pub. … seeking out and informing individuals who are unknown to it about the possibility of assistance to those who adopt or who become legal guardians of a special needs child, in the instant case the appellees and Jamison were clearly

Richard Parsons v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 11, 2016

Marple, __ W.Va. __, __ S.E.2d __, 2015 WL 7101971 (2015) (emphasis added) (citations omitted) (“The defense of qualified immunity ‘is not waived if the defendant “raised the issue at a pragmatically sufficient time, and … App. 2003) (“The burden of proof to establish waiver of arbitration is heavy, and the party seeking to establish waiver must show that it has been prejudiced by the actions of the party requesting arbitration.”); Lovelace

State of West Virginia v. Izzac Christopher Weister

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 3, 2022

In the instant case, the text messages and nude photograph sent to the victim were disturbing in that they clearly expressed the petitioner’s desire to engage in sexual relations with a minor and clearly solicited the minor … He clearly continues to manifest problematic behavior that makes him inappropriate for release into the community.”

In re A.L.C.M.

239 W. Va. 382 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 9, 2017

The majority reasons that since A.L.C.M. qualified as an "abused” or "neglected” child at the time the petition was filed, the petition was statutorily compliant. … Aug. 19, 2009) (holding father’s failure to take any action to protect unborn child from mother's drug use was sufficient to establish that he knowingly allowed the child to remain in conditions and surroundings that endangered

Corey D. v. Michelle H.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 2, 2021

West Virginia law allows paternity to be established in three ways. … First, as a result of the lower court’s determination that the respondent Travis R. is the child’s legal father, the issue of whether he may qualify as the child’s psychological parent was left unresolved. See Syl.

In re: I.A.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 10, 2020

These findings shall not be set aside by a reviewing court unless clearly erroneous. … Petitioner also argues that the circuit court admitted opinion testimony from T.R.’s forensic interviewer, who was not qualified to serve as an expert witness.

Sherree D. Martin, of the Estate of Shirley A. Martin, Trustee of the Shirley A. Martin Trust, and Trustee of the Carl J. Martin, Sr. Trust v. William A. Martin, Sherree D. Martin, Carl J. Martin, II, Teresa A. Martin Pike, Carl Robert Martin, Patrick Stephen Martin, Carli Jo Martin, Jeffrey Todd Edgell, Martina Elizabeth Ann Edgell, Jasmine Pike, and Sophia Pike, interested parties to the Estate of Shirley A. Martin, The Shirley A. Martin Trust, and The Carl J. Martin, Sr. Trust and Carl J. Martin, II, Teresa A. Martin-Pike, Patrick Stephen Martin, Carl Robert Martin, Carli Jo Martin, Jasmine Pike, and Sophia Pike v. Sherree D. Martin

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 2, 2023

Martin, Sr. established two trusts designated as Trust A and Trust B. … The Carl Martin Trust is a qualified terminable interest property trust (hereinafter “QTIP”). Following the death of Shirley A. Martin in 2019, Sherree D.

Harbert v. County Court of Harrison County

129 W. Va. 54 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 21, 1946

No other clause or section of the Constitution so qualifies or limits the language of Section 38 of Article VI, unless the terms of the judicial amendment of 1902 can properly be given that effect. … E. 529 , this Court used this appropriate and clearly applicable language: “The authority of a state legislature is of the essence of sovereignty; it would be absolute but for constitutional limitations.

State Ex Rel. City of Charleston v. Sims

132 W. Va. 826 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 1, 1949

reported, we held: “The State Liquor Commission is an agency of the State, engaged in the performance of governmental functions and duties, and, as such, is, under Section 35 of Article VI of the Constitution of this State, immune … But to say that their findings of fact may be made conclusive where constitutional rights of liberty and property are involved, although the evidence clearly establishes that the findings are wrong and constitutional rights