Case law

State ex rel. Surnaik Holdings of WV, LLC v. The Honorable Thomas A. Bedell

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 20, 2020

These issues are central to this case and are sufficient to establish commonality under W. Va. R. Civ. P. 23(a). c. … The requirement is satisfied “if resolution of some of the legal or factual questions that qualify each class member’s case as a genuine controversy can be achieved through generalized

Community Antenna Service, Inc. v. Charter Communications VI, LLC

227 W. Va. 595 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 23, 2011

If a Charter customer qualified for and received services under the plan — and about 800 did — the customer got some variation of cash rebates, credits, and/or reduced rates while simultaneously receiving added cable services … Public Service Commission, 25 we indicated that Charter’s buy-back pricing plans were “simply rate discrimination” under the Cable Television Service Act. 26 We found that the “record clearly demonstrates that a very few

Collins v. AAA Homebuilders, Inc.

175 W. Va. 427 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Aug 7, 1985

Once it is established that the Equal Protection Clause is invoked, the next step is to determine whether the particular subject matter, in this case housing, is a fundamental or constitutional right. … Obviously, where blanket exclusions are made of unpopular groups, equal protection principles are clearly implicated under this theory. .

Gainer v. Gainer

30 W. Va. 390 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1887

In that case, the administrator of the deceased appellant had qualified since the case had been entered in the Court of Appeals as abated by .the death of the appellant. … This claim seems to be in direct conflict with the very words of the statute, which would seem clearly to confine the representative of the plaintiff to this second term of the court to revive the cause, and, if it be not

Harper v. Pauley

81 S.E.2d 728 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 5, 1954

In these circumstances, we think no waiver is established. … Under the well established rule that the findings of a trial chancellor based on conflicting evidence will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly wrong or against the preponderance of the evidence, the decree entered by

Campbell v. Beard

57 W. Va. 501 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 28, 1905

Its finding ought not to be disturbed unless this Court can see that it is clearly wrong. … In numerous cases courts have refused to enforce performance of the contract upon establishment of the unwillingness of the wife to join in the conveyance, but in every such instance her unwillingness has been pleaded as

B. & O. Railroad v. P. W. & Ky. Railroad

17 W. Va. 812 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 7, 1881

Wheeler , in conflict with what has been here said, it is intended to be restrained and qualified by this opinion.” The opinion cites with approbation the case of B. & O. R. Co. v. … The result would be to a large extent immunity from all legal responsibility. It is not to be supposed, that Congress intended, that the important powers and privileges granted should be followed by such results.”

Yurish v. Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 19, 2021

The content of the speech at issue in this appeal clearly relates to “broad issues of interest to society at large.” 10 Id. … We believe Bartnicki clearly precludes Petitioners’ action under the Federal Act as well.

Employee Resource Group and Charles Rice v. Connie Harless

West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 13, 2017

Harless establishes that she cannot pay her portion of the filing fee, ERG will pay her portion of the fee. … Instead, Petitioners requested to have this matter sent directly to arbitration and clearly stated they waived mediation. 6  4.

Davis v. Demming

12 W. Va. 246 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1877

Morris in his answer neither admitted nor positively denied the usury, which however was clearly proved by the testimony in the cause (see 2 Munf. 207 ). … of the court I entirely concur for the reasons assigned by Judge Moncure in his opinion ; but in his opinion he expressed views, which are inserted in the syllabus of the case, in which I cannot concur without at least qualifying

State v. Dilliner

212 W. Va. 135 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 26, 2002

seems reasonable to require, as we did in Clawson, some in camera disclosure of the methodology, scientific reliability, and results of the HGN test, as well as evidence of whether accepted test procedures were followed by qualified … Witte that the State had not established the scientific reliability of the HGN evidence, and that the police officer’s testimony about his observations could not establish that reliability. Accord, State v.

State v. Miller

194 W. Va. 3 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 18, 1995

In addition, we find the *20 defendant did not meet her burden of proof to establish ineffective assistance, nor did she establish the trial court committed plain error by failing to give the jury a self-defense instruction … Assi, 748 F.2d 62, 65 (2d Cir.1984) ("[t]he purpose of jury instructions is to inform the jury clearly and succinctly of the role it is to play and the decisions it must make”).

State of West Virginia ex rel. Gabriel Devono and The Board of Education of Randloph County v. The Honorable David H. Wilmoth, Judge of the Circuit Court of Randolph Coutny, Sherman Arbogast, and Marlene Arbogast

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 15, 2023

The petitioners contend that the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s wrongful termination and negligence claims in Duerring I because of his failure to exhaust administrative remedies establishes that Mrs. … Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

State of West Virginia v. Scott A. Neal

West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 5, 2016

Showalter and the Petitioner’s brother, the Petitioner was clearly the aggressor once he became involved. … Thus, pursuant to West Virginia Code § 29-21-2 (2013), the Petitioner would no longer qualify for court-appointed counsel. In State ex rel. Kees v.

Board of Review of the Bureau of Employment Programs v. Gatson

210 W. Va. 753 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 1, 2001

The findings of fact of the Board of Review of the West Virginia Department of Employment Security are entitled to substantial deference unless a reviewing court believes the findings are clearly wrong. … The petitioners, a state senator and surviving spouses of deceased state workers, requested that the Board be required to extend the optional insurance coverage to those who qualified.

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Schatken

230 W. Va. 201 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 16, 2012

The circuit court granted partial summary judgment as to the non-duplication provision, denied the motion to strike, and established a new briefing schedule for the reimbursement issue. … Certainly a tortfeasor’s liability policy would qualify as “any other policy.”

Dale Anthony and Shatika Marie Campbell v. Annette Schoew

West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 10, 2017

Respondent argued that the survey clearly demonstrated a violation of the five-foot setback covenant. … As such, it was not established that petitioners could, or in fact did, move the applicable “lot lines” by acquiring adjoining land.

Taylor v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.

190 W. Va. 160 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1993

SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO., a New York Corporation Qualified to do Business in the State of West Virginia, Defendant Below, Appellant. No. 21135. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. Submitted January 26, 1993. … Significantly, however, we acknowledged that "some of the provisions in W.Va.Code, 21-3-1 through -18, involve safety requirements that are clearly the responsibility of an employer because they involve machines or other

Reager Ex Rel. Reager v. Anderson

179 W. Va. 691 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 22, 1988

Scott, 516 So.2d 576 (Ala.1987), the court refused to set aside a $1,000,000.00 verdict as clearly excessive. … Under this test we, like the trial court, do not believe the damages awarded in this case are clearly excessive.

Adkins v. Adkins

221 W. Va. 602 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 8, 2007

Furthermore, Appellant’s circumstances while incarcerated do not appear to meet the remainder of the statutory qualifiers for application of the attribution of income statute. … We do not have in the matter before us someone who is incarcerated in the regional jail system, although the establishment of a comparable program developed with legislative input would have obvious benefits.