Case law

Held v. Monongalia Emergency Medical Services, Inc.

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Sep 17, 2024

Under West Virginia law, If the plaintiff identifies a clearly established right or law which has been violated … from vicarious liability, but the public employee or official is not entitled to immunity in accordance with State v.

Pledger v. Lynch

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Sep 27, 2018

established that Wilson, Anderson, and Andrea Hall were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs [Doc. 153]. … immunity.

Asbury v. Ritchie County Commission

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jan 16, 2018

The Commission argues that it is statutorily immune from liability on this claim. The West Virginia Governmental Tort Claims and Insurance Reform Act, W. Va. … To qualify as a “final policymaking official,” a municipal official must have the responsibility and authority to implement final municipal policy with respect to a particular course of

Lee v. Bishoff

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jun 16, 2022

Third, the defendants emphasize that all of the individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiff cannot establish constitutional violations under any of the facts he alleges. … The plaintiff does not dispute that he covered his cell window’, and what little of the stationary video in the plaintiff's cell which still exists, clearly establishes that the plaintiff used something to cover the camera

Grand China Buffett & Grill, Inc. v. State Auto Property & Casualty Co.

260 F. Supp. 3d 616 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · May 16, 2017

In light of clearly established West Virginia precedent, Ullom’s underlying claims for statutory violations, “emotional distress, embarrassment, [and] humiliation,” without more, do not fall within this definition. … Because Ullom did not allege a covered "bodily injury,” the Court need not address State Auto’s alternative arguments that the incident does not qualify as an "occurrence,” or that Sun’s conduct triggers the Subject Policy

McALONEY v. Gutierrez

557 F. Supp. 2d 694 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Mar 4, 2008

Successful completion of RDAP generally qualifies an inmate to be considered for up to one year of early release. … It is well established that in order to demonstrate a due process violation, a petitioner must show that he was deprived of a liberty or property interest protected under the Fifth Amendment. Greenholtz v.

Alza Corp. v. Mylan Laboratories, Inc.

349 F. Supp. 2d 1002 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Dec 7, 2004

In the section entitled “Objects of the Invention,” the patent qualifies the term in numerous ways: “sustained-release dosage form,” “solid-oral dosage pharmaceutical form,” “drug delivery dosage form,” “controlled-release … Moreover, Mylan has failed to establish the absence of material factual issues with respect to any anticipation challenge.

Sisler v. Califano

484 F. Supp. 326 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Dec 6, 1979

Buff concluded that the Plaintiff was qualified for black lung benefits based upon (1) a positive x-ray; (2) ventilatory study results; and (3) because he was functionally illiterate. The AU noted that Dr. … Buff; these clearly constitute “clinical findings”. Moreover, it appears that Dr. Buff’s conclusions were based upon an x-ray taken by Dr. C. W. Nelson for Dr. Buff and contained in the record at Transcript 162.

Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. United States Food & Drug Administration

23 F. Supp. 3d 631 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · May 29, 2014

In sum, the FDA found that only the first party to challenge both the original patent and reissued version of that patent qualifies for 180-day marketing exclusivity. … If the hardship balance tilts sharply and clearly in the plaintiffs favor, the required proof of likelihood of success is substantively reduced.

Frogge v. Fox

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jun 10, 2019

Finally, Defendant argues that it is entitled to qualified immunity. Plaintiff filed Objections1 [Dkt. … Plaintiff was qualified to receive the benefits of public service, program, or activity A plaintiff is “qualified” if she is “an individual with a disability

Blanchard v. United States

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Nov 8, 2017

The United States cannot be sued in a tort action unless it is clear that Congress has waived the government’s sovereign immunity and authorized suit under the FTCA. Dalehite v. … Clearly, the plaintiff made no mention that his injury was the result of his being assigned to a top bunk in violation of a lower bunk pass, and therefore, the Bureau of Prisons was not given the opportunity to investigate

Haubrich v. Entzel

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · May 7, 2019

As to findings where no objections were made, such findings and recommendations will be upheld unless they are “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). … Ct. 2243 (2016), his 2 Pennsylvania conviction for aggravated assault does not categorically qualify as a crime of violence

American Casualty Co. of Reading, Pa. v. Morris

51 F. Supp. 889 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Sep 30, 1943

In order to meet these'requirements and to qualify him as a carrier, Morris applied for and received the policy in question. … This would clearly indicate that each endorsement was considered separately and either approved, disapproved, or returned for further action.

Marietta Area Healthcare, Inc. v. King

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Feb 23, 2023

“[T]he mere fact of reliance upon the advice of counsel does not establish the defense in a malicious prosecution case. … Under § 3730(d)(4) a qui tam defendant must establish that the plaintiff’s action was clearly 29 frivolous, clearly vexatious or brought primarily for

Hagins v. Kallis

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Mar 19, 2019

The petitioner requests that this Court grant the writ and issue an immediate hearing, resentencing him without the enhancements based on two prior convictions that can no longer qualify as predicates … As to those findings to which objections were not filed, all findings and recommendations will be upheld unless they are “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A).

Henry v. Jefferson County Planning Comm'n

148 F. Supp. 2d 698 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jun 26, 2001

immunity for their acts and/or omissions under Harlow v. … Henry has not established the first element of an Equal Protection claim; he cannot establish that both he and Lowe were similarly situated. 210 Both Lowe and Henry had to operate within the five step framework for applying

Lancaster v. USP Hazelton

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

In his R&R, the magistrate judge correctly and logically explained why the Defendant is immune from suit under the FTCA. … On its face, this document appears to qualify as a good faith effort to comply with the requirements of § 55-7B-6.

Collins v. Entzell

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Aug 15, 2019

by the holding of Stokeling and qualifies as a violent felony under the ACCA’s force clause. … Because binding precedent within this Circuit clearly forecloses relief on the grounds that the purported sentencing error is not sufficiently grave to be deemed a fundamental defect, the Court finds it unnecessary

Timberline Mountain Operations, LLC, Timberline Property Management, LLC, and Valley Scenic View, LLC v. The County Commission of Tucker County

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Mar 17, 2026

“The [Supreme] Court has . . . rejected any suggestion that a state tax or regulation affecting interstate commerce is immune from Commerce Clause scrutiny because it attaches only to a … The statute, however, provided that institutions “conducted or operated principally for the benefit of persons who are not residents of Maine” qualified only for a more limited tax benefit.

Reynolds v. Vandervender

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Dec 22, 2017

However, clearly a conclusory allegation does not suffice. … However, the docket in that case, which was opened on September 21, 2019, clearly establishes that a Notice of Deficient Pleading and Intent to Dismiss was entered in that case.