Case law

Wheeler v. Exline

150 W. Va. 481 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 22, 1966

Arnold Exline was never formally appointed, confirmed or qualified as deputy sheriff by the County Court of Clay County. … That there can be a de facto deputy is well established by the laws of this State and other jurisdictions. See Code, 6-5-3; 43 Am. Jur., Public Officers, §469; State ex rel Bailey v. Wayne County Court, 92 W.

Ches. & Ohio R. R. v. Pack

6 W. Va. 397 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1873

By an act passed since <the act establishing the Code, sec. 5 of Chap. 52 has been amended and re-enacted. … The law declared that the people within the limits of its operation, should have privileges and immunities that were not in their character proper to be conferred upon a mere potential corporation, but were appropriate only

Dadisman v. Moore

181 W. Va. 779 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1989

Instead, they have chosen to enter a “special appearance” primarily for the purposes of arguing their immunity from suit. … First, although immunity for discretionary acts is the general rule, it has long been established that “[m]ere ministerial duties of legislative officers, not involving the exercise of any discretion or of legislative functions

Herold v. McQueen

71 W. Va. 43 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 25, 1912

For the rule is, that the court must be clearly and strongly convinced of its unconstitutionality before it will be justified in declaring an act void. … We think clearly that the question is chiefly one of expediency, a matter for legislative, and not judicial, judgment.

Higginbotham v. Clark

189 W. Va. 504 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 20, 1993

Boone informed State Farm Claim Superintendent Rheney that “[a] review of the [appellant’s] claim file reveals it was established, this insured does not qualify for Coal Mine Subsidence Insurance Coverage, because he had … After the appellant filed his first claim under this policy in which he alleged mine subsidence damage, the Board clearly told the insurance company that the appellant did not qualify for mine subsidence coverage.

Ball v. Life Planning Services, Inc.

187 W. Va. 682 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1992

ERISA’s authors clearly meant to preclude the States from avoiding through form the substance of the pre-emption provision. Id. 451 U.S. at 525 , 101 S.Ct. at 1907 . … According to the respondent’s brief, GRIP Medical Trust was a qualified ERISA trust sponsored and established by Rental Associates, Inc., to provide hospitalization and medical benefits for members and their employees.

Jackson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

215 W. Va. 634 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 2, 2004

Based on this rule, we believe that it was clearly wrong for the circuit court to permit Mr. … Diaz has been recognized as an expert, there is a danger that jurors may consider him more qualified to determine the issue of malice than they are.

State Ex Rel. Hudok v. Henry

182 W. Va. 500 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1989

We find these principles to be well established and to follow our understanding of the First Amendment free press clause. In State ex rel. Daily Mail Publishing Co. v. … "Governmental officials must, therefore, demonstrate that the information sought is clearly relevant to a precisely defined subject of governmental inquiry. Watkins [v.

David Duff, II v. Kanawha County Commission

West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 22, 2024

Thus, the records do establish a pre-existing back condition with a definite ascertainable functional impairment. … The degree of the preexisting impairment may be established at any time by competent medical or other evidence.

State Ex Rel. Bennett v. Sims

131 W. Va. 312 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 16, 1948

In the same case it was held that, whether or not an appropriation is for public or for private purpose, is a judicial question; and that if it does not clearly appear that the appropriation is for a purely private purpose … There being no way by which the immunity of the State can be waived, under our existing Constitutional provisions, it seems to us that any discussion of these points would be purely academic.

Nestor v. Bruce Hardwood Floors, L.P.

210 W. Va. 692 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 12, 2001

The appellant clearly failed to establish that his filing of a workers’ compensation claim was a significant factor in Bruce Hardwood’s decision to discharge him. … As a practical matter, that employee enjoys immunity from discharge for a certain period after filing his or her claim.

In re D.S., L.J., and K.J.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 13, 2024

Scheller, who was qualified as an expert in pediatrics, child neurology, and neuroimaging; and (2) Dr. Keith Button, a biomechanical engineer who was qualified as an expert in that field. Dr. … These findings shall not be set aside by a reviewing court unless clearly erroneous.

State of West Virginia v. Caleb T.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 17, 2022

clearly appears that its discretion has been abused.’ … Groves during the trial established her intensive training and experience working as a clinical social worker, a field in which she diagnoses mental health disorders.

Williby v. West Virginia Office Insurance Commissioner

224 W. Va. 358 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 2, 2009

“In other words, the employee may not recover workers’ compensation benefits, and the employer is not immune from a negligence action.” Brown, 212 W.Va. at 125 , 569 S.E.2d at 201 . … In fact, her testimony during two separate depositions, on January 10, 2005, and on July 25, 2005, establishes an opposite conclusion.

Algoma Coal & Coke Co. v. Alexander

66 S.E.2d 201 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 30, 1951

That it did not do so indicates clearly that it intended to permit such section foreman to act as a fire boss and that, with knowledge of its existence, it recognized the established practice, which enabled a section foreman … It is obvious that the Legislature, which is presumed to be cognizant of the long established practice which permitted a qualified section foreman holding a certificate of competency to act in the capacity of a fire boss,

State of West Virginia ex rel. Patrick Morrisey v. Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston and Michael J. Bransfield

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 16, 2020

records, compliance with the West Virginia school bus safety regulations, administration of a nationally-normed standardized achievement test, and establishment of a school specific crisis response plan. 30 If a church … An amendment to § 18-28-6 was introduced in 2020 that 31 would have removed the immunization obligation. 2020 W. Va.

Hardy v. BH EX REL. GH

228 W. Va. 334 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 18, 2011

section 45-2.020(3)(C)5, which establishes the appeal procedures within the Department. … Here, Appellee did not attempt to establish Appellant’s condition when she was deemed eligible for the services, and consequently, did not establish a change in circumstances.

State Ex Rel. Boner v. Kanawha County Board of Education

197 W. Va. 176 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 19, 1996

That statute, which addresses the employment of substitute teachers, clearly only applies when there is either a temporary absence of a teacher during the school term, a teacher on leave of absence, or some other board-approved … The Board’s plan has arguably affected the pool of teachers qualified for homebound instruction.

Hock v. City of Morgantown

162 W. Va. 853 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 3, 1979

be *855 passed except by an affirmative vote of at least four-fifths (4/5) of the members of the Common Council, is valid since it is undisputed that: (1) the Morgantown Planning Commission disapproved the amendment; (2) qualifying … Appellees contend that the above quoted section provided that only a simple majority vote is required to adopt or amend any ordinance while appellants contend that the charter merely established a minimum majority requirement

Board of Education v. Townsend

207 W. Va. 285 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 25, 2000

Appellant challenged the Board’s decision on the ground that she was more qualified than Ms. Foy. … Id. .As the Board emphasizes, the grievant has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence the facts necessary to establish her claim in a non-selection case.