Case law

Saunders v. Burton

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 27, 2022

risk of serious harm to the Plaintiff from the conditions of his confinement” [Id. at 14–15]; and (3) Defendants have qualified immunity [Id. at 17–18]. … The showing necessary to establish each component “varies according to the nature of the alleged constitutional violation.” Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 5 (1992); De’Lonta v.

Tovar v. Marshall

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 25, 2024

immunity in his individual capacity. … As noted in , well-established Fourth Circuit precedent has recognized that “the transfer or release of an inmate from the facility where he suffered the challenged conditions ‘moots his claims for injunctive and

Mixer v. M.K.-Ferguson Co.

17 F. Supp. 2d 569 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 12, 1998

But the Supreme Court has qualified this rule, reasoning that: On occasion ... the pre-emptive force of a statute is so extraordinary that it converts an ordinary state common-law complaint into one stating a federal claim … Clearly, § 301 does not grant the parties to a collective-bargaining agreement the ability to contract for what is illegal under state law.

Fields v. U.S. Marshals Service

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · May 16, 2023

For inextricably intertwined challenges, “the court should resolve the relevant factual disputes only after appropriate discovery, unless the jurisdictional allegations are clearly immaterial or wholly unsubstantial and … Hurwitz, 62 F.4th 127, 142 (4th Cir. 2023) (“[W]aivers of sovereign immunity must be strictly construed.”).

Mahood v. Ames

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 28, 2024

Where a claim has been summarily refused, the Court must simply determine whether that decision was legally and factually reasonable under clearly-established federal law. , 236 F.3d 149, 158 (4th Cir. 2000) (When … court’s determination ‘resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.’”).

Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, Inc. v. Apogee Coal Co.

555 F. Supp. 2d 640 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · May 27, 2008

In other words, SMCRA regulations cannot be construed to impose effluent limitations more stringent than those established under the authority of the CWA. … To qualify as a "minor modification” and avoid the public notice procedures required for a major modification, changes to a permit must fit within specific enumerated categories.

Carpenter v. Perry

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 3, 2023

Furthermore, the defendant officers were not entitled to qualified immunity, as “[n]othing in the statutes or rules would give a reasonable officer reason to believe that he or she may … immunity.

Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition v. Horinko

279 F. Supp. 2d 732 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 29, 2003

The term “existing uses” is not used, however, to establish when Tier 2 review is required. … Accordingly, there is no need to qualify that general definition with the term “generally.”

Van

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 21, 2026

After I establish a factual foundation, I apply my nearly 20 years of law enforcement experience. … Perhaps these “aggressive acts” refer to conduct that a video of the incident clearly shows: Van physically resisting arrest. See Video 1, at 0:00–1:04, 1:13–1:18, 3:11–3:56.

Wilson v. Wexford Medical and Administration/staff at fault

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 19, 2019

.”); also Johnson, 785 F.2d at 510 (holding that a motion for leave to amend should be denied “when the proposed amendment is clearly insufficient or frivolous on its face.”) (citing Davis v. … Although the Eleventh Amendment refers only to suits by citizens of other states, the Supreme Court has construed the Amendment to “establish that an unconsenting State is immune from suits brought in federal court by

Hatcher v. United States

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Oct 5, 2017

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) establishes a one-year statute of limitations for federal inmates seeking post-conviction relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f). … Any habeas petition filed pursuant to Mathis would clearly be untimely under § 2255(f)(1).

Devine v. American Benefit Corp.

27 F. Supp. 2d 669 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Nov 13, 1998

The Court of Appeals held "Where, as here, the language of the Plan does not qualify the right to reimbursement by reference to the costs associated with recovery, we are bound to enforce the contractual provisions as drafted … To the extent these common law concepts are not wholly preempted by ERISA, they clearly lack merit. 8 .

Lester v. Gardner

257 F. Supp. 526 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 8, 1966

The final decision holds that plaintiff failed to establish that he was disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act before June 30, 1958, when he last met the earnings requirements, and that he failed to establish … The record discloses that plaintiff has never followed a strict diet with regard to this condition and that a number of the medical reports clearly indicate that the condition is remedial.

Lockhart v. Dolgencorp, LLC

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 15, 2019

That amount was clearly in dispute, regardless of the Defendant’s assessment of the merits of the Plaintiff’s claims. … The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ counsel’s hours and hourly rate are reasonable.1 He is a well-qualified, experienced attorney.

Smith v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP

769 F. Supp. 2d 1033 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 11, 2011

Summary judgment is appropriate when the nonmoving party has the burden of proof on an essential element of his or her case and does not make a showing sufficient to establish that element. Celotex Corp. v. … The second type of preemption— express preemption — arises “when Congress has clearly expressed an intention” to preempt state law. College Loan Corp. v. SLM Corp., 396 F.3d 588, 595-96 (4th Cir.2005).

R. v. Justice

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 12, 2024

qualify. … The deliberative process privilege is qualified; therefore, Plaintiffs may overcome the privilege by “establishing the existence of a sufficient need for the information that outweighs any harm from its production

Dickens

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Dec 10, 2025

As to whether the statute imposes a duty to offer underinsurance upon insurers other than as expressly delineated, the Legislature clearly anticipated this issue and responded statutorily by providing: “No insurer is required … The second qualifying event above, namely, the request by named insured event, also never occurred.

Diego v. United States

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 5, 2025

His motion further requests “a reduction of sentence, to establish the record, as a career offender.” (Id. at 12). … Accordingly, his current § 2255 motion was clearly untimely filed under § 2255(f)(1).

Estes v. Midwest Products, Inc.

24 F. Supp. 2d 621 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Nov 4, 1998

The prerequisites for asserting personal jurisdiction are well-established in the Fourth Circuit. … The court again endorsed the stream of commerce language of Worldr-Wide Volkswagen but qualified it by arguing that “[ujnique or insignificant relations with the forum suggest an absence of purposefulness, leading to the

Marfork Coal Co. v. Smith

274 F.R.D. 193 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 17, 2011

It applies in the context of discovery as a qualified privilege against disclosure of information when the party asserting the privilege demonstrates that the disclosure would likely impair the associational activities of … Clearly, the information which Plaintiff seeks concerns the members and associational activities of Climate Ground Zero.