Case law

Liston v. University of West Virginia Board of Trustees Ex Rel. West Virginia University

190 W. Va. 410 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1993

Clearly, however, this assertion overlooks the value of Ms. Johnson’s expert testimony. *413 In Adkins v. … established and the damages assigned by the jury for the plaintiff’s loss of enjoyment of life-were itemized and specified in the jury verdict form.

In Re: M.R.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Sep 21, 2015

These findings shall not be set aside by a reviewing court unless clearly erroneous. … First and foremost, to qualify as plain error, we must find that error has occurred.

State v. Carduff

142 W. Va. 18 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 26, 1956

disqualified to serve in a criminal case by reason of their prior jury service in the trial of another defendant charged with a similar but independent criminal offense when the same witnesses are used by the prosecution to establish … The ingrafting into the criminal procedure of a novel practice like that here disclosed ought not be permitted, except in the face of a situation clearly showing the bias, prejudice, and lack of impartiality of the juror.

Powell v. Mitchell

120 W. Va. 9 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 22, 1938

“An employer whose business comes within the. purview of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, and who does not take advantage of the immunity, is not liable for an injury sustained by an employee in the course of Ms employment … That being so, for this reason alone, the evidence fails to establish any liability on the part of the defendant under counts two and three of the declaration.

State of West Virginia v. Timothy M. Conner, II

West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 15, 2021

This Court has established that “[t]he appellate standard of review of questions of law and certified by a circuit court is de novo.” Syl. Pt. 1, Gallapoo v. Wal- Mart Stores, Inc., 197 W. … Both statutes clearly reflect that an overdose event is, by its very nature, emergent and life threatening, demanding immediate medical intervention.

State v. Wilson

157 W. Va. 1036 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Aug 1, 1974

Hoke, 76 W.Va. 36 , 84 S.E. 1054 that: “It is within the judicial discretion of the trial court to permit a witness for the state, who is familiar .with the facts on which the prosecuting attorney relies to establish the … It would appear that the limitation of such evidence was clearly within the discretion of the trial court. 3A Wigmore, Evidence § 894 (Chadbourne rev. 1970).

Quintrell v. Lincoln County Board of Education

195 W. Va. 347 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 17, 1995

The most reasonable way to insure that the most qualified person is found to fill a position is to post a notice of its availability so that all interested and qualified persons may be apprised of it. 179 W.Va. at 205 , 366 … After the five day minimum posting period all vacancies shall be filled within twenty working days from the posting date notice of any job vacancies of established existing or newly created positions.

State ex rel. West Virginia Citizen Action Group v. Tomblin

227 W. Va. 687 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jan 18, 2011

Code § 3-10-2, the Legislature established the procedure to be followed regarding the holding of a new or special election for governor. … The procedure established in the second paragraph of W.

Ellison v. Doe

215 W. Va. 517 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 18, 2004

“The ‘but for’ test is satisfied and the uninsured motorist claim can go forward only if the injured insured presents independent third-party testimony by disinterested individuals which clearly shows the negligence of an … Foutty’s statement does not qualify as sufficient corroborative evidence worthy to establish that another vehicle was a proximate cause of the accident. The circuit court correctly found that Ms.

State ex rel. Dodrell v. Payne

87 W. Va. 306 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 21, 1920

Eavenson was elected one of the three commissioners of the county court of McDowell Cou-nty for a term of six years beginning January 1, ,1917, and duly qualified to discharge and did discharge the duties of the office until … Clearly this is untenable since the committee, by formal action taken when calling the convention, authorized and empowered its chairman to ratify and confirm the action of the convention, thus making the candidate so se-

State of West Virginia v. Michael and Kim Blatt

235 W. Va. 489 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 16, 2015

The State argues that the circuit court’s presumption is not clearly erroneous. We agree with the Blatts. … While this incident clearly illustrates that Tinkerbell— or any dog—can cause harm, we do not believe that the facts in the record establish the likelihood that Tinkerbell poses such a risk of future harm to the public

Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism, Inc. v. Pickens

District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Aug 6, 2025

Ultimately, the plaintiff, as the party invoking federal jurisdiction, bears the burden of establishing these three elements and must clearly allege facts demonstrating that each … Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982) (qualified immunity); Wood v.

Casdorph v. West Virginia Office Insurance Commissioner

225 W. Va. 94 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 19, 2009

This record does contain qualified experts that do not believe these case studies are persuasive and also criticize them for methodology and the size of the study. This is an extremely close case. Dr. … Appellant contends that the evidence presented overwhelmingly shows that the BOR ruling was clearly wrong and should be reversed.

State v. Pendry

159 W. Va. 738 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 20, 1976

As to the defense of insanity, it is the clearly established rule in this State that the defendant is required to establish his insanity by a preponderance of the evidence. State v. Myers, supra; State v. … Mullaney in no way requires any departure in this State from that well-defined and clearly established rule. The separate opinion of Mr.

Lambert v. Workers' Compensation Division

211 W. Va. 436 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 3, 2002

However, specialists may not be qualified to evaluate impairments outside their given specialty. … However, the record, when considered as a whole, does not clearly establish that Mr. Payne was PTD prior to April 5, 1999.

State ex rel. Daily Gazette Co. v. Bailey

152 W. Va. 521 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 23, 1968

D. *522 Bailey, Secretary of State of West Virginia, to permit the petitioners “to inspect the certificates on file in his office which purport to establish the right of the ‘American Party’, its candidates for President … It is most relevant that these signers are required by statute to be “legally registered and qualified voters,” and that they may subscribe to such certificate only in the magisterial district in which they are qualified

White v. Berryman

187 W. Va. 323 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 15, 1992

Having established the procedure for service of process on a public corporation, we address the service in this case. Here the service was attempted by serving Mr. … His affidavit clearly indicates that he was aware of the legal consequences of the suit.

State Ex Rel. McMahon v. Hamilton

198 W. Va. 575 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1996

If a person under any disability does not have a duly qualified representative he may sue by his next friend. … If a person under any disability does not have a duly qualified representative he may sue by his next friend.

Clark v. Druckman

218 W. Va. 427 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 30, 2005

The rationale behind the immunity afforded to defamatory statements is equally applicable to other misconduct occurring during the course of a judicial proceeding. … According to the statute, a certificate of merit executed by a qualified expert is also to be provided in most circumstances.

Arbonaise v. Weinberger

401 F. Supp. 983 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Oct 16, 1975

In order to qualify for the interim presumption under 20 C.F.R. § 410.490 (b) (1) (i), the x-ray (or biopsy or autopsy, which are inapplicable here) must establish the presence of pneumoconiosis, and the Secretary obviously … The failure of a miner to qualify under the interim presumption in 20 C.F.R. § 410.490 (b) does not prevent him from establishing his eligibility under the permanent rules. 20 C.F.R. § 410 .-490(e).