Case law

Ziegler v. Clay County Sheriff

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 18, 2020

.; “and/or any/all other Federal Statutes on violations of clearly established Federal Civil Rights and Federal Laws as determined by the U.S. … established Right not to be deprived of Property without Due Process of Law.”

Bailey v. United States

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 27, 2023

As Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn noted, Bailey is correct: conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery no longer qualifies as a predicate crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). … Furthermore, a court may address the two prongs in any order and a failure to establish one prong obviates a need to address the other.

Ward v. LiNA Medical USA, Inc.

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jan 5, 2021

“Material” facts are those necessary to establish the elements of a party’s cause of action. Anderson v. … It did not create a blanket immunity for hospitals under all theories of negligence, and inasmuch as these are direct theories of liability, RGH presents no argument against holding it liable

Atkins v. AT&T Mobility Services, LLC

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

as an “other paper” for removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(3) and could begin the thirty-day period if it clearly established the criteria for CAFA jurisdiction. … May 9, 2014) (“A ‘fail safe’ class is one that ‘is defined so that whether a person qualifies as a member depends on whether the person has a valid claim.

West Virginia Department of Health & Human Resources v. United States Department of Health & Human Services

899 F. Supp. 2d 477 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 26, 2012

Subsection 1320b-2(a) thus establishes a general two-year limitations period for all claims filed by states for FFP dollars related to the administration of Medicaid programs. … As they are not clearly erroneous or contrary to the statute, the Secretary’s regulations and her interpretations of those regulations are entitled to substantial deference.

Cooper v. Westfield Insurance Company

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 22, 2020

have an effect on the employment relationship” qualify as “employment-related” acts. … See supra at 12 (“only acts, which ‘intentionally’ cause the alleged injury and ‘clearly have an effect on the employment relationship’ qualify as ‘employment-related’ acts”).

McCoy v. Kanawha County Board of Education

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

McCoy has not pleaded or otherwise argued (nor could she plausibly do so) that news media qualifies as an “employer” in the context of this case. … the above balancing test and factors clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity analysis) (quoting Ridpath, 447 F.3d at 317).

Old White Charities, Inc. v. Bankers Insurance, LLC

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · May 14, 2018

A denial must fairly respond to the substance of the matter; and when good faith requires that a party qualify an answer or deny only a part of a matter, the answer must specify the part admitted and qualify … Va. 431, 460 S.E.2d 677, 684 (1995) (the claimant bears the burden of establishing the applicability of the attorney-client privilege or the work product exception).

Blankenship v. United States

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Nov 18, 2020

Rule 701 of the Federal Rules of Evidence permits lay opinion testimony that is “rationally based on the witness’s perception, helpful to clearly understanding the witness’s testimony or to determining a fact in issue, … Rule 702 permits a witness who has been qualified as an expert to offer opinion testimony under specified circumstances. Fed. R. Evid. 702.

United States v. Gray

362 F. Supp. 2d 714 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 17, 2005

Gray and also found that he did not qualify for a mitigating role reduction. Accordingly, I found Mr. Gray’s total offense level to be 32. … Clearly, it is a long-standing and deeply cherished tradition of this nation to bar the state from depriving a person of their liberty without certainty of guilt.

Silling v. Erwin

885 F. Supp. 881 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Apr 25, 1995

The Co-Executors qualified to serve on June 9, 1993. Erwin died on May 21, 1994 and this action is maintained against his widow, Edna Marie Litton Erwin, as executrix of his estate and the Bank. … However, the Plaintiff argues “[t]he general rule [that fraud, in general, is never presumed and when alleged it must be established by clear and distinct proof] is qualified and the burden is shifted where a fiduciary relationship

Pippins v. United States

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 12, 2022

If the movant is clearly unable to state a claim that entitles him to relief, the court may deny the motion without an evidentiary hearing. Raines v. United States, 423 F.2d 526, 529 (4th Cir. 1970). … Farrell noted in his affidavit, and as the record clearly reflects, he made significant efforts to challenge Thompson’s testimony, specifically regarding the gun. ECF No. 208 at 3-4.

Asbury v. Pocahontas Coal Company LLC

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 14, 2023

Despite being qualified for the positions for which she applied, each of the Defendants refused to hire her and, instead, hired male applicants. … “The doctrine of fraudulent misjoinder is relatively new and not clearly defined.” Id.

White v. Searls

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 31, 2023

As stated above, this court may not grant relief unless the state court adjudication resulted in a decision that “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined … Based on the foregoing, the magistrate judge found the state court decision “was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law; or based on an unreasonable determination of the facts

Ortiz v. Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 1, 2019

Material facts are those necessary to establish the elements of a party’s cause of action. Anderson v. … If a transferee qualifies as an HDC, it is immune to “virtually all defenses.” See One Valley Bank v. Bolen, 425 S.E.2d 829, 831 (W. Va. 1992).

Johnson v. West Virginia University Board of Governors

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 19, 2025

Lefkowitz clearly testified that Defendants met the standard of care during all of Plaintiff’s treatment. (ECF No. 251-3 at 132:17-25.) Subsequently, Dr. … In Phoenix, the Fourth Circuit held that “[t]here is no per se rule that expert testimony is necessary to establish an Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference claim.

Mills v. Cabell County Board of Education

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 6, 2023

Furthermore, the CCBOE’s argument is unavailing that Plaintiff’s notes cannot qualify as work product because she is not an attorney. … Clearly, that estimate does not accurately reflect the cost of properly responding to this discovery request.

Jackson v. Elswick

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 18, 2022

Jackson endured from their misuse of power, despite their opinion that they are afforded immunity, because they were acting agents of the state. ECF No. 104. … This objection is an assertion of how Plaintiff views the matter and a reiteration of his position that Defendants are not entitled to judicial immunity. See ECF No. 95 at 2.

United States v. Shrader

737 F. Supp. 2d 589 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 16, 2010

Defendant takes issue with the United States’ assertion that Section 2261A(2) should be read to allow a unit of prosecution for each person who qualifies as a victim of the proscribed conduct. … The undersigned finds the Supreme Court’s decision in Ladner helpful as it establishes the analytical framework for deciding this matter but not dispositive as it concerned a completely different statute with a completely

Young v. Act Fast Delivery of West Virginia, Inc.

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jan 3, 2018

Thus, “[w]hen a worker is economically dependent on a putative employer—or . . . his putative joint employers—he qualifies as an employee protected by the FLSA. … This amount of control exercised by Omnicare clearly amounts to the ability to direct and control the Plaintiffs.