Case law

Estate of Elizabeth E. Fox

131 W. Va. 429 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 18, 1948

Fox seems to have resided in Morgantown, Monongalia County, West Virginia, but on a date, not clearly shown in the record, she went to live with her son and daughter-in-law at their home in the- State of Pennsylvania. … Such findings are clearly correct and will not be disturbed by this Court. Accordingly, the judgment of the Circuit Court of Monongalia County is affirmed. Affirmed.

Hancock County Board of Education v. Hawken

209 W. Va. 259 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 12, 1999

Code, 18-29-1, et seq. (1985), and based upon findings of fact, should not be reversed unless clearly wrong.” Syl. pt. 1 Randolph County Board of Education v. Scalia, 182 W.Va. 289 , 887 S.E.2d 524 (1989). … Our Legislature has devoted great attention to the regulation of school service personnel, and has established an exhaustive list of class titles 3 describing the general duties of any person working as a school service employee

SER Justin S. Golden, Sr. v. Hon. Tod J. Kaufman, Judge

236 W. Va. 635 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 16, 2014

By its use of prohibition to alter long-established common law, rather than as a means to enforce and uphold existing law, the majority acted in a manner that was highly irregular and clearly unwarranted. 3 B. … Co., supra (establishing strict liability in tort for manufactured products); Harless v.

Christopher Bird v. Kanawha County Board of Education

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 4, 2019

First, petitioner argues that the circuit court erred in concluding that Policy G68 was not arbitrary and capricious; he contends that the policy was arbitrary and capricious because it does not establish a ban or similar … Therefore, as a regular employee, petitioner held a place among the top priority group of applicants, and in that group he was the most senior applicant qualified for the position.

O'Donnell v. Biolife Plasma Services, L.P.

384 F. Supp. 2d 971 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 30, 2005

First, Biolife claims that Plaintiff cannot show she was qualified for the job because her underlying claim is that she was disabled and unable to perform her work. … Clearly, under the terms of the policy, Plaintiffs argument that her termination affected her ability to apply for long term disability benefits is simply wrong.

Makarenko v. Scott

132 W. Va. 430 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 8, 1949

But if such relation did exist between them the decision of this Court in the Tawney case is clearly to the effect that the workmen’s compensation statute does not relieve a fellow employee from liability for his negligent … That decision makes it plain beyond question that no such immunity exists in *452 favor of a fellow employee by virtue of the statute.

Stanley v. United States

321 F. Supp. 2d 805 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jun 18, 2004

III.Analysis The FTCA operates as a limited waiver of sovereign immunity for injury or loss caused by the negligent or wrongful act of a government employee acting within the scope of his or her employment. Medina v. … Stanley argues that the Court should disregard this precedent and instead follow what he characterizes as a contrary rule established in Poindexter v. Bonsukan, 145 F.Supp.2d 800 (E.D.Tex.2001).

State ex rel. Zickefoose v. West

145 W. Va. 498 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 12, 1960

“Since a constitution is a fundamental charter of government a limitation upon eligibility for office expressed therein presents only the question of the meaning of the particular disqualification, as its validity is established … If the intention is manifest from the language used and leads to no absurd conclusion, courts must give such provisions the effect clearly intended.” 4 M. J., Constitutional Law, Section 7, page 94.

Truman Bays v. Performance Coal Co.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 12, 2014

In order to meet the third requirement it must be established that he is unable to return to substantial gainful employment. West Virginia Code § 23-4-6(n)(2) (2005). … Bays’s home and found that jobs were available for which he would be qualified or could become qualified through short-term training. Based upon the vocational reports of Mr. Williams and Mr.

Hammonds v. Prime Care Medical of West Virginia, Inc.

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 13, 2020

[2] was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.’” … Circuit since at least 1976 and, thus, was clearly established at the time of the events in question.’”

Grewe v. United States (In Re Grewe)

148 B.R. 824 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. West Virginia · Nov 27, 1992

The I.R.S. concludes that, because the debtors cannot establish that the position of the I.R.S. was not substantially justified, they cannot be considered a prevailing party within the meaning § 7430(c)(4)(A), and, therefore … The court found that the statutory authorization for the award of attorneys fees, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (b), was an express waiver, although limited, of sovereign immunity. See Conti at 128. 8 .

James Robert Hendricks v. West Virginia Consolidated Public Retirement Board

Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · Aug 6, 2025

Hendricks voluntarily enlisted in the Armed Forces and, thus, the Board’s three exhibits established that Mr. … Moreover, as established both by Ms.

Eldercare of Jackson County, LLC d/b/a Eldercare Health and Rehabilitation, a Tennessee company Community Health Association d/b/a Jackson General Hospital, a West Virginia corporation and Irvin John Snyder, D.O. v. Rosemary Lambert and Carolyn Hinzman, Individually, and as Co-Executors of the Estate of Delmar P. Fields

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 12, 2024

Respondents allege that Eldercare has a history of failing to establish and maintain an effective infection control policy at its facility. … If the legislative intent is clearly expressed in the statute, then this Court is not permitted to construe the statutory provision but, rather, is obliged to apply its plain language.

Kelley & Moyers v. Bowman

68 W. Va. 49 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Aug 10, 1910

It is a well established rule of construction that it is not permitted to interpret what needs no construction. … To thus qualify or deny this power of the hoard eve must run counter to the rule that hardly needs any authority, but is clearly stated in Railroad Co. v. Traction Co., 56.W. Va. 18.

At MASSEY COAL CO., INC. v. Meadows

476 F. Supp. 2d 578 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 1, 2007

As grounds for dismissal, defendant argues that plaintiffs' suit is barred by the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, that plaintiffs lack standing, and that she is entitled to qualified immunity. … Three elements are necessary to establish standing. First, the plaintiff must have suffered an "injury in fact." White Tail Park, 413 F.3d at 458 .

Tony T. Gerlach v. David Ballard

233 W. Va. 141 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 28, 2013

“The Double Jeopardy Clause in Article III, Section 5 of the West Virginia Constitution, provides immunity from further prosecution where a court having jurisdiction has acquitted the accused. … The petitioner’s argument is based upon his contention that second degree murder is established by proving an intent to harm, which he says is the same intent that must be proven to establish the offense of death of a

Hertzog v. Fox

141 W. Va. 849 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1956

in the minutes of the council that the petitioner had been duly elected to the office of councilman but whether it did or did not issue and deliver to the petitioner a certificate of the result of the election does not clearly … Because of the marked difference between the statute involved and the facts established in the Qualls case and the applicable statute and the undisputed material facts in the present proceeding the decision in the Qualls

Michael Thornsbury v. W. Va. Consolidated Public Retirement Board, etc.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Feb 9, 2018

We review challenges to findings of fact under a clearly erroneous standard; conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.” Syl. Pt. 4, Burgess v. Porterfield, 196 W. Va. 178, 469 S.E.2d 114 (1996). … Insofar as [Dodd] holds that an employee’s misconduct results in a forfeiture of the entire pension, it is still good law because the requirement of honorable service has been established in advance and

Childress v. MUZZLE

222 W. Va. 129 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 19, 2008

Additionally, we believe that the Act was clearly designed to serve not only the interest of qualifying unemployed persons, but also the general public. 3 The unemployment compensation program is an insurance program, and … If otherwise qualified for unemployment compensation benefits, they would not be disqualified under the above-mentioned section of Law.

Joshua Dwayne Plante v. Josh Ward, Interim Superintendent, Mount Olive Correctional Complex

West Virginia Supreme Court · Feb 20, 2024

We review the final order and the ultimate disposition under an abuse of discretion standard; the underlying factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard; and questions of law are subject to a de novo review.” … Further, petitioner’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is governed by the two-pronged test established in Strickland v.