Case law

State Ex Rel. Hechler v. Christian Action Network

201 W. Va. 71 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 16, 1997

Code, 22-19-5 [1992], Clearly not included in the above list of information in W. Va. … Code, 29-19-8 [1992] clearly limits the Secretary of State’s review to “[organizations applying for registration[.]”

State of West Virginia v. Joseph Loudin

West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 10, 2015

In that order, the circuit court quashed petitioner’s subpoenas for 1 jurors Josh Wilt and Sheila Johns, finding that petitioner had not established bias on the part of either … Petitioner argues that the State failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, each and every element of the crime charged and the evidence clearly did not support the verdict.

State Ex Rel. KW v. Werner

242 S.E.2d 907 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 3, 1978

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor … We accept the opinions as being given by qualified persons. [3] W.Va.Code, 49-5-16, adopted by the 1977 Legislature and effective January 1, 1979, establishes standards for dealing with delinquent juveniles in detention and

Tex H. v. David Ballard, Warden

West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 24, 2017

In West Virginia, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are governed by the two-pronged test established in Strickland v. … Therefore, in addition to the question of the diary’s authenticity, it would have been duplicative of what was already established at the hearing.

Vangilder v. Hoffman

22 W. Va. 1 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1883

These decisions clearly establish this as the law. … But is it true, that these deeds do as it is contended that they do, clearly establish, that the first deed made by Vangilder to Hoffman, was an absolute sale of all his lands at half their value, and that there was no understanding

State v. Loveless

139 W. Va. 454 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 9, 1954

This instruction clearly and properly defines an accessory before the fact. … Lilly, 47 W.Va. 496 , 35 S.E. 837 , this evidence clearly, and beyond all reasonable doubt, establishes that one of the four principals fired the shot which killed Sarah Reed, and, inasmuch as her murder occurred during the

Frantz v. Palmer

211 W. Va. 188 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 14, 2001

In this case, the within a “reasonable time” period prescribed by the Legislature for the issuance of tax decisions was clearly exceeded by the Tax Commissioner. … The surety must be qualified to do business in this state. These bonds shall be conditioned that the taxpayer shall perform the orders of the court.

SER Olen L. York III v. W.Va. Office of Disciplinary Counsel & W.Va. Lawyer Disciplinary Board

231 W. Va. 183 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 5, 2013

The petitioner’s situation is clearly distinguishable from the Allen scenario. His legal undertaking, albeit it federal in nature, was performed from an established West Virginia location for West Virginia clients. … federal regulation, give the State’s licensing board [in Sperry, the Florida Bar Association] a virtual power of review over the federal determination that a person or agency is qualified

In re A.O., D.T., and E.C., Jr.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 15, 2024

The court found that the DHS did consider petitioner for relative placement but determined he did not qualify under its policies. … Va. 643, 647, 814 S.E.2d 660, 664 (2018) (permitting relative caregivers, among others, “a meaningful opportunity to be heard” under the “two-tiered framework” established by § 49-4-601(h)).

State Ex Rel. Frieson v. Isner

168 W. Va. 758 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 18, 1981

A fair reading of article 8 of our constitution reveals that the Legislature and the judiciary were to act in concert in establishing the magistrate court system. … Such representation is clearly not contemplated by the law.

Michael Gilbert, Administrator v. W. Va. Dept. of Transportation

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 10, 2016

If these two factors are satisfied, and the testimony has been found to be relevant, and the expert is qualified, the expert may testify at trial. … “The question of . . . 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.” State v.

State Ex Rel. Safeguard Products International, LLC v. Thompson

235 W. Va. 197 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 11, 2015

The obligation to pay the deficiency is conditioned only upon the happening of the event and establishment of the “loss,” that is, the destruction or unrecovered theft of the vehicle … State law.”). 11 incorporating the same, in order for the GAP Insurance to qualify as a debt cancellation agreement, Safe-Guard was required to be the lender of the loan.

Alexander Ex Rel. Ramsey v. Willard

208 W. Va. 736 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 8, 2000

The trial’s judge’s determination that the offered evidence did not constitute habit evidence under Rule 406 of the West Virginia Rules of Evidence was not in error. 6 We have consistently held that in order to qualify as … Curative instructions can be effective in altering the prejudicial effect of comments from the bench where a judge “clearly explain[s] to the jury that it is free to disregard his remarks and must determine the facts and

State of West Virginia v. Michael V.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 30, 2020

The court therefore found that the State presented sufficient evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that petitioner committed sexual abuse by a custodian in violation of West Virginia Code § 61-8D-5. … Finally, it is undisputed that petitioner, as H.V.’s stepfather, qualifies as either a parent, guardian, custodian, or person in a position of trust to H.V.

State of West Virginia v. Frank Gene Thompson

813 S.E.2d 59 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 5, 2018

juror bias during voir dire was not sufficient to overcome the insurmountable obstacle that members of the jury pool knew Petitioner’s guilty plea had not materialized.5 For a court to rule that a prospective juror was qualified … Consequently, the State cannot establish that the error was rendered harmless beyond a reasonable doubt by the curative instruction or voir dire.8 For this reason, Petitioner’s convictions must be reversed.

Porter v. Bego

200 W. Va. 168 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1997

Under these circumstances, a final equitable distribution order is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard; the underlying factual findings are reviewed under a clearly erroneous standard; and questions of law and … The word "income” means gross income unless the word is otherwise qualified or unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context.

Calwell v. Prindle's Adm'r

11 W. Va. 307 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Sep 10, 1877

It does not appear when Prindle died, or when the defendant Mathews qualified as his administrator ; but the plaintiff alleges in his bill that defendant Mathews recently qualified as administrator, &c. … But plaintiff would clearly be incompetent to do so by his testimony given in his own behalf.

Donna Hamilton v. Jaiyoung Ryu, M.D.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 20, 2017

only entirely within the court’s discretion, but also consistent with the West Virginia Medical Professional Liability Act, which requires that “a defendant’s failure to meet the standard of care, if at issue, shall be established … “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

Hereford v. Meek

132 W. Va. 373 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1949

Steele died testate on September 22, 1946, and the defendant qualified as his executor on September 26, 1946. … In the case of such unambiguity, it is the established policy of the courts to regard the statute as meaning what it says, and to avoid giving it any other construction than that which its words demand.

Charles L. v. David Ballard, Warden, Mt. Olive Correctional Complex

West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 6, 2019

We review the final order and the ultimate disposition under an abuse of discretion standard; the underlying factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard; and questions of law are subject to a de novo … It would be entirely speculative as to whether the victim would have qualified for a taint expert or that a taint expert could have been found who would have testified in a way favorable to Petitioner such that it would have