Case law

Pride, Inc. v. State ex rel. State Human Rights Commission

176 W. Va. 565 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 11, 1986

clearly wrong in view of the reliable, probative and substantial evidence on the whole record. … Therefore, the Commission was clearly wrong in determining that a prima facie case of discrimination prior to November 3, 1975, was established.

Hayes v. Town of Cedar Grove

128 W. Va. 590 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 12, 1946

Clearly, we think the statute creates a cause of action which did not theretofore exist. … If there had been no immunity from the action of negligence against the Town of Cedar Grove, the plaintiff would still have been required to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, some negligent act on the part of

Mellon-Stuart Co. v. Hall

178 W. Va. 291 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 18, 1987

Though the court of claims is not a judicial body, it clearly operates in a judicial capacity. Its judges are lawyers, who serve as neutral and detached decision-makers. … The act establishing the court provides for a specialized forum, akin to a court, which is empowered to formally and conclusively adjudicate claims against the sovereign.

Deborah L. Hale v. W. Va. Dept. of Transportation, Div. of Highways, etc.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 28, 2013

According to petitioner, all she was required to establish was that she was more qualified than Respondent Cook. … Based on the foregoing, including the Court’s affirmation of the circuit court’s findings as to Respondent Cook’s qualifications, we find that petitioner could not even establish that she was more qualified than Respondent

Cahill v. Mercer County Board of Education

208 W. Va. 177 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 12, 2000

Code, 18-29-1, et seq. (1985), and based upon findings of fact, should not be reversed unless clearly wrong.” Syllabus Point 1, Randolph County Bd. of Ed. v. Scalia, 182 W.Va. 289 , 387 S.E.2d 524 (1989). Syl. … Because the circuit court’s November 1998 order violates well-established principles of review, we reverse and remand for entry of *182 an order affirming the Boards hiring decisions and upholding the conclusion of ALJ Weekly

State ex rel. Hardesty v. Aracoma—Chief Logan No. 4523

147 W. Va. 645 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 12, 1963

In support of that position several well established ■ principles of law are noted. … Here the appellant is engaged in an activity which is clearly taxable under the provisions of Code, ll-13-2c, as amended.

Henry v. Benyo

203 W. Va. 172 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 13, 1998

A review of this statutory provision suggests that the language clearly articulates the intent of the legislative drafters. … established by W.Va.Code § 17D-4-2, but not mandating underinsured motorist coverage); Deel v.

State Ex Rel. Sams v. Ohio Valley General Hospital Ass'n

149 W. Va. 229 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1965

That this hospital receives charitable immunity is of no probative value in determining its status as a public or private hospital. Many charities of a private nature enjoy such immunity. … established.

City of Marmet v. Anthony Hunter, Administrator of the Estate of Kareem Hunter

West Virginia Supreme Court · May 17, 2018

in the record, the decedent was twenty-nine years of age. 3 The two men were later identified as Miguel Quinones and Deveron Patterson. 4 The record in this civil action does not clearly … a special relationship had been established between the political subdivision and the injured party.

State v. Willey

97 W. Va. 253 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Sep 30, 1924

M., for what reason it does not clearly appear, and taken to the office of the prosecuting attorney. The bottle of liquor was found in a pocket in the car and brought into the prosecuting attorney’s office. … The witness then said he had not been promised immunity.

State ex rel. Wausau Business Insurance v. Madden

216 W. Va. 776 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 11, 2005

Discussion Wausau contends that the lower court was clearly wrong in holding that Wausau waived any objections to discovery when it failed to contemporaneously raise its attorney-client and work-produet objections with a … Three exceptions relevant in the case before us are the attorney-client privilege, work-product qualified immunity and protection of “a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense

Adkins v. Hope Engineering & Supply Co.

81 W. Va. 449 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 27, 1917

But plaintiff does allege, and his counsel insist, that, although defendant has in all respects done what the act requires to entitle it to the immunities and prescriptions thereof, the act does not purport to work an exoneration … Nothing in our Workmen’s Compensation Act prohibits *456 an employer who qualifies thereunder from engaging the services of a minor; nor except when expressly prohibited by law is such employment unlawful. Westerlund v.

Morris Memorial Convalescent Nursing Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Human Rights Commission

189 W. Va. 314 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 21, 1993

The appellant contends that the findings of the Commission are clearly wrong and are unsupported by substantial evidence. … The burden of establishing a prima facie case of disparate treatment is not onerous.

Napper v. Rice

127 W. Va. 157 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 31, 1944

The value of the property at the date of the deed is not clearly shown. … be distinctly and clearly proven.

Shaffer v. Stanley

215 W. Va. 58 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 4, 2003

The opinion then went on to discuss the state's sovereign immunity and the exception to that immunity when liability insurance coverage is obtained. … because of the State's sovereign immunity."

Brian Frye v. Erie Insurance Company

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 12, 2024

Frye had not 5 offered evidence to establish that Erie engaged in pattern or practice of claims handling that violated the Unfair Trade Practice Act, West Virginia Code §§ 33- … And we have an expert to testify – THE [CIRCUIT] COURT: Which is why this is about immunity. You guys can couch it any way you want, this is about immunity.

State Ex Rel. West Virginia Real Estate Appraiser Licensing & Certification Board v. Chiles

234 W. Va. 125 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Sep 18, 2014

The Board’s authority is clearly statewide. … Notably, the test set forth in syllabus point one of Blower is the same test that is used to determine whether an organization is a state agency for purposes of immunity.

State Ex Rel. Crosier v. Callaghan

160 W. Va. 353 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 17, 1977

It found no Constitutional or statutory provision establishing a “Director of Office Services.” … The right petitioners seek to enforce is clearly set forth in W. Va. Code, 21-5C-2,-3.

Sitzes v. Anchor Motor Freight, Inc.

169 W. Va. 698 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 23, 1982

interspousal immunity. … The issue in this case arises out of a tort, not a traditionally settled area of the law, and it is clearly foreshadowed by our decisions prior to Coffindajfer overruling other common law immunities, particularly family immunities

State Ex Rel. Frazier v. Hrko

203 W. Va. 652 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 7, 1998

Petitioner Frazier contends that the trial court’s ruling is clearly erroneous as a matter of law. … Furthermore, neither employer may assert the immunity from suit provided by W.Va.