Case law

Brown v. Hudgins

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Oct 21, 2022

U.S., 909 F.2d 869 (6th Cir. 1990) (“The FTCA clearly provides that the United States is the only proper defendant in a suit alleging negligence by a federal employee”). … To meet that standard, Plaintiff must establish that the Government was not exempt from the FTCA pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2680(a).

Lahens v. United States

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Sep 11, 2017

Jurisdiction and Applicability of the Federal Tort Claim Act The United States enjoys sovereign immunity except to the extent that Congress has waived such immunity by enacting the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 … of 3 pages of Plaintiff’s medical records provided by the parties are insufficient to establish the standard of care.

Larry v. United States

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Oct 14, 2020

immunity. … Department of Justice [Doc. 1-6] clearly indicates that the administrative claim was in fact received on May 2, 2018.

Bailey v. Boilermakers Local 667 of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers

480 F. Supp. 274 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Nov 29, 1979

Doski also clearly holds that § 1985(3) is not an available mechanism to enforce rights created by Title VII, id. at 1334, nor does it provide a cause of action for violation of rights flowing directly and exclusively from … of a hiring hall or a pool of persons out of which a union may refer qualified applicants for jobs with particular employers.

Kesling v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

491 F. Supp. 569 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jun 20, 1980

(Where the ALJ posed a similar hypothetical, but failed to acknowledge that Plaintiff was precluded from returning to his former employment, and where the record evidence clearly demonstrated that Plaintiff was precluded … The only medical evidence of record which would appear to substantiate entitlement to black lung benefits is the results of a single pulmonary function study which result in qualifying” values for MW and FEV1.

Richardson v. West Virginia Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Mar 24, 2022

Therein, Defendant Aguilera argues that the Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for the remaining counts and that he is entitled to the protection of qualified immunity. … The remaining support for the Plaintiff’s objection refers the Court to arguments made in the complaint, which, under this Court’s Local Rules and the 3 The Court notes that Defendant Aguilera asserts qualified immunity

Valero Terrestrial Corp. v. McCoy

36 F. Supp. 2d 724 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Sep 17, 1997

Clearly, case law establishes the Supreme Court’s disfavor of declaratory judgments which permit a plaintiff to avoid the constraints of the Eleventh Amendment. … Chambers clearly establishes that this is unconstitutional. Finally, this Court finds that the local preference statute is discriminatory on its face.

Frederick Business Properties Co. v. United States

55 F. Supp. 2d 524 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jul 30, 1999

Daughtridge failed by radio to clearly communicate the situation to Newell. Next, Daughtridge physically left the building in order to communicate the fire alarm to Newell in person. … The FTCA constitutes a waiver of sovereign immunity of the United States with regard to “... injury or loss of property, or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the

Smith v. Clark, Jr.

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Feb 27, 2023

“The employer, in turn, exchanges common law defenses for conditional statutory immunity.” Id. at 777. … While there are important differences between this case and a case in which “deliberate intent” is at play, the Supreme Court has clearly stated that to apportion fault to a nonparty, it

Young v. Doe 1

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Sep 9, 2024

Moreover, given the procedural history and the posture of the case—the parties were engaged in discovery, and Defendant Spain was clearly defending the suit when Plaintiff filed this Motion—the Court cautions Plaintiff’ … The claims here are governed by section 55-7-13d, which, as noted above, preserves immunities and defenses.

Mutafis v. Erie Insurance Exchange

561 F. Supp. 192 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Mar 25, 1983

Therefore, the Defendant’s conduct was measured by a standard sufficient to establish liability even if the communication was protected commercial speech under the First Amendment. … This argument ignores Section 6(c) which clearly states that: “[n]o order of the commissioner pursuant to this article or order of court to enforce it, or holding of a hearing, shall in any manner relieve or absolve any person

United States v. Eureka Pipeline Company

401 F. Supp. 934 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Oct 8, 1975

Thus, Defendant claims, the immunity granted by paragraph (5) should be extended to cover the penalty imposed by paragraph (6) which it claims is also penal in nature. … Rogers Morton, 161 U.S.App.D.C. 68 , 494 F.2d 987 (1974), and clearly provides for the necessary elements of due process.

Metheney v. Deepwell Energy Services, LLC

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jun 29, 2021

In his reply, plaintiff contends that Taylor was “clearly wrong.” [Doc. 101 at 1]. Plaintiff argues that if this Court follows Taylor, it will create an absurdity–“[f]ollowing the verdict, Mr. … This resolves the problem argued by plaintiff– that the defendants’ interpretation renders the immunities referred to in § 55-7-13d surplusage: a nonparty can be attributed fault and still retain their immunity.

Friend v. Remac America, Inc.

924 F. Supp. 2d 692 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Feb 14, 2013

However, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia clearly stated that the two-prong test applies to “a case involving an alleged breach of contract.” Id. … Plaintiffs allegations regarding Defendant’s undercapitalization are all qualified by may and possible. Plaintiff makes no allegation establishing that it is plausible that Defendant was undercapitalized.

Chitwood v. Feaster

54 F.R.D. 204 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jan 20, 1972

It is under these conditions, these circumstances, these provisions, and with these clearly defined positions of the parties that these plaintiffs commenced their teaching careers at Fairmont State College. … Plaintiffs, as teachers qualified and subject to employment by the state, are entitled to apply for the positions and to have the discretion of the authorities exercised lawfully and without unconstitutional discrimination

Henderson v. Henrie

142 F. 568 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Nov 16, 1905

Judge Tucker agrees: “It is possible that (under our statute) a verbal declaration of trust, if ■clearly proved, might be sustained.” … Henrie seeks to qualify the agreement with the condition that Henderson was not to “run it up” on him, and that he did bid it up on him.

Cadle v. Rubenstein

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Nov 20, 2018

Then, on September 4, 2018, defendant Jeremy Smith (“Smith”) moved to dismiss the Complaint for failure to state a claim and because he is entitled to qualified immunity (Dkt. No. 51). … Courts will uphold those portions of the recommendation to which no objection has been made unless they are “clearly erroneous.” See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins.

Reed v. Sell

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Oct 13, 2017

Permanent deprivation of one’s personal property qualifies as meaningful interference with a possessory interest. … Although Officer Clyde’s conduct is governed by these provisions, he also is clearly entitled to immunity from Reed’s 28 REED V

Guynup v. Christian

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Oct 21, 2024

establish: (1) a person acting under color of state law (2) deprived the plaintiff of “a right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.” Dowe v. … Here, the Plaintiff has not established any of the three required elements to sustain a claim under the ADA.

Warren v. Tate

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Oct 2, 2024

Further, defendant Kinser would enjoy absolute immunity from such a claim. … “[T]he Constitution creates no entitlement to grievance procedures or access to any such procedure voluntarily established by a state.” Adams v. Rice, 40 F.3d 72, 75 (4th Cir. 1994) (citations omitted).