Case law

Ramaco Resources, LLC v. Chubb INA Holdings, Inc.

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jun 30, 2020

The law regarding work product is well established. “The work-product privilege protects from discovery an attorney’s work done in preparation for litigation.” … By early January 2019, the parties involved in the investigative process clearly knew that Ramaco intended to sue Federal if the silo claim was denied.

Moore v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company

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

The responses very clearly laid out which matters Defendant Peninsula admitted and denied. … Defendant Peninsula has very clearly failed to meet its burden as the party opposing discovery.

West Virginia Ass'n of Community Health Centers v. Sullivan

737 F. Supp. 929 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 1, 1990

Neither does section 1008 clearly express the intent of Congress with respect to the use of funds for abortion counseling and referral. … At issue in Regan were Internal Revenue Code provisions that denied eligibility to otherwise qualified tax-exempt organizations for tax-deductible contributions for all activities if they engaged in “substantial lobbying”

AbbVie Inc. v. Morrisey

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Dec 17, 2024

Novartis has established this fact in its briefing. … These “costs are unrecoverable given West 30 Virginia’s sovereign immunity.”

Hall v. Gestamp West Virginia, LLC

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 11, 2021

A plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of disability discrimination by showing “that [s]he (1) is a . . . person with a disability, (2) is qualified to perform the essential function … ‘the similarity between comparators must be clearly established in order to be meaningful.’” Swaso v. Onslow Cty. Bd. of Educ., 698 F.

Jeffrey v. Ames

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 25, 2020

“Establishing that a state court’s application of Strickland was unreasonable under § 2254(d) is all the more difficult. … He says that no reasonably qualified attorney would “fail to exhaust” his trial counsel’s “numerous opportunities to admit this evidence.” (ECF No. 32, at 5.)

Young v. Western-Southern Agency, Inc.

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 20, 2024

The LTIR Plan meets all of the aforementioned requirements to be an “established” plan. … Therefore, any plan that is established by Defendants that defers compensation or provides retirement income, will necessarily qualify as an ERISA-governed “employee pension benefit plan.” Guiragoss v.

Barksdale v. Rickard

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Feb 4, 2020

Petitioner objects to the PF&R’s finding that he cannot bring his claims under § 2241 because he does not qualify for the savings clause exception. … The Fourth Circuit’s analyses in Foote and Lester clearly support this understanding. In United States v.

The Courtland Company, Inc. v. Union Carbide Corporation (Courtland II)

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Feb 23, 2021

“[I]ntangible . . . material,” while outside the scope of Rule 26(b)(3), also “qualifies for protection from discovery under the work product doctrine” as set forth in Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 (1947). … Plaintiff objected that the request seeks protected work product and stated, “[Defendant] has produced numerous documents through discover [sic] which establish the Union Carbide Filmont landfill property boundaries

WEST VIRGINIA ASS'N OF COM. HEALTH v. Sullivan

737 F. Supp. 929 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 1, 1990

Neither does section 1008 clearly express the intent of Congress with respect to the use of funds for abortion counseling and referral. … At issue in Regan were Internal Revenue Code provisions that denied eligibility to otherwise qualified tax-exempt organizations for tax-deductible contributions for all activities if they engaged in "substantial lobbying"

Holland

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 23, 2026

Conversely, Plaintiff relies on Meadows and Wolfe in claiming that “the terms of employment establishing [his] entitlement to the vacation pay are set forth clearly and unambiguously” in the Letter … Nevertheless, Defendant contends that, rather than establishing terms of employment, the Letter “established terms of separation from employment.”

Graham v. Dhar

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

Ward testified that another individual at BRMC was more qualified than him to testify as to Topic 8. As to Topic 10, plaintiff argues that Dr. … Rumley were unprepared clearly also falls within the scope of Rule 37(d)(1)(A).

Gibson v. Warden

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 15, 2021

there ha[d] been a showing that [petitioner had] clearly demonstrated acceptance of responsibility.” (Tr. 56:15-22.) … Petitioner also objects to the overall conclusion that his petition does not qualify under the savings clause. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e).

United States v. Toledo

615 F. Supp. 2d 453 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · May 11, 2009

His criminal prosecution is not “unanticipated and unforeseen,” and thus immune from the deterrent value of suppression. Id. … Ultimately, the court held “that the exclusionary rule does not apply to evidence to establish the defendant’s identity in a criminal prosecution.” Id.

Slocum v. United States

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 20, 2021

“The double jeopardy clause clearly prohibits the division of a single criminal conspiracy into multiple violations of a conspiracy statute.” United States v. … The movant’s fifteenth objection is to the magistrate judge’s finding that he qualifies as a career offender. Id.

R. v. Justice

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 17, 2023

Additionally, Rule 23(b) establishes three categories of permissible class actions. … [ECF No. 318-1, ¶ 6; ECF No. 318-10, ¶ 10]. 44 Proposed counsel have clearly demonstrated their expertise in civil rights class

Massie

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 12, 2026

“Next, the ALJ must determine if the mental impairment is severe, and if so, whether it qualifies as a listed impairment.” Patterson, 846 F.3d at 659; see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520a(d), 416.920a(d). … To the extent that the ALJ did not elaborate further on the analysis of Claimant's impairments in combination, the undersigned finds further elaboration was unnecessary because the required analysis clearly took place.

Ramaco Resources, LLC v. Chubb INA Holdings, Inc.

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Dec 1, 2020

gives a qualified answer to the rest. … Defendants very clearly buried their admissions and denials within baseless objections and wordplay, which required Ramaco to file a motion to compel and expend resources to receive straightforward answers.

The Courtland Company, Inc. v. Union Carbide Corporation (Courtland I)

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 29, 2020

If anything, it is “clearly” material because it is a central claim of the complaint. … As the court stated in Courtland II, “[w]hether an activity or instrumentality qualifies as ‘abnormally dangerous’ is a question of law for the court,” and “[i]n determining whether

G.T. v. Kanawha County Schools

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 24, 2021

A single page of deposition transcript relied upon for a line of testimony on a subject clearly under discussion before and after that page does not carry significant evidentiary weight. 2 Should the Plaintiffs wish to … Lower courts denied relief, and the Supreme Court established standards for schools’ obligations under the IDEA and remanded. Id.