Case law

State v. Stewart

187 W. Va. 422 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 28, 1992

Dunn, 162 W.Va. 63 , 246 S.E.2d 245 (1978), this Court ruled that improper remarks are not reversible error unless, when considering the whole trial, the statements work “a manifest injustice” or “clearly prejudice the accused … Gallemore as a better qualified expert.

Manchin v. Browning

170 W. Va. 779 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Sep 16, 1982

W.Va.Code, 5-3-2 [1972], The Attorney General’s primary duty is clearly to the State. … Pursuant to this authority the commission voted to establish a 65-foot limit, but a trial court held that rule invalid.

United States v. Daily Gazette Co.

567 F. Supp. 2d 859 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jun 19, 2008

The plan centered on a rapid reduction of the Charleston Daily Mail’s subscriber base in the hopes the newspaper would qualify as a “failing company” within 2 to 3 years. (Id. ¶ 19). … Microsoft Corp., 309 F.3d 193, 202-03 (4th Cir.2002) (“To establish a violation of § 1 of the Sherman Act, ...

Williams v. Charleston Area Medical Center, Inc.

215 W. Va. 15 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 12, 2003

rulings of the circuit court concerning a new trial and its conclusion as to the existence of reversible error under an abuse of discretion standard, and we review the circuit court’s underlying factual findings under a clearly … Specifically, the regulations state: “[a]n employer shall make reasonable accommodation to the known physical or mental impairments of qualified individuals with disabilities where necessary to enable a qualified individual

Lane v. Boston Scientific Corp.

198 W. Va. 447 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1996

Boston Scientific, which is not qualified to do business in West Virginia, maintains no registered agent here and, at no time, has maintained an office here. Mr. … Clearly, none of the provisions of [W. Va.Code,] 31-1-15 apply, as all actions pertaining to the 3 discrete causes of action, occurred in other States.

Tiernan v. Charleston Area Medical Center, Inc.

203 W. Va. 135 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 21, 1998

Prior judicial decisions may also establish the relevant public policy. … Weirton Steel Corp., 191 W.Va. 278 , 445 S.E.2d 219 (1994), however, "a bad motive will defeat a qualified privilege defense."

Hubbard v. Kelley

8 W. Va. 46 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 17, 1874

Justice Davis, delivering the opinion of the Court, (Id. 126,) said: “The immunity of the United States from suit is one of the main elements to be considered in determining the merits of this controversy. … the appeal or when it was taken, or made to the commissioner, I am unable to discover ' how the court could determine that the action was brought within the time prescribed by law, and yet that was a special issue, and clearly

Rhodes v. Workers' Compensation Division

209 W. Va. 8 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jan 24, 2001

Because this procedure was not clearly established prior to this opinion, we reverse this case and remand for additional proceedings. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Robert S. Rhodes (hereinafter “Mr. … Because the procedure and burden set forth in this opinion were not heretofore clearly established, we find it appropriate to reverse the final order of the WCAB and remand this case for an additional hearing on Mr.

Central West Virginia Regional Airport Authority v. West Virginia Public Port Authority

204 W. Va. 514 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Feb 5, 1999

Clearly, the phrase “with the concurrence of the affected public agency” is meant to modify the preceding portion of the sentence wherein such phrase is found. … Congress failed to establish a Wayport Commission. .

Carl Campion v. W. Va. Dept. of Education

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 3, 2016

Kisner scored petitioner as the most qualified candidate. On June 3, 2013, Mr. … Petitioner argues that he presented sufficient facts to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination because he was qualified for the position and was over the age of forty while the younger applicant did not meet the

Adams v. Londeree

83 S.E.2d 127 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 27, 1954

The same conclusions are clearly reflected under the present State "consent" statute and the applicable Act of Congress quoted above. … In the opinion, with respect to the act of the Legislature consenting to the establishment of the asylum, the court said: "This act of the State Legislature, consenting to the establishment of the asylum within her borders

State v. Peel Splint Coal Co.

17 L.R.A. 385 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 6, 1892

These principles, thus clearly announced by this Court, are sustained by all the best authorities, by the elementary writers and by the Supreme Court of the United States. In the leading case of Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. … This third section appears to my mind just as clearly the exercise of a police power.

Thomas v. Thomas

174 W. Va. 387 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1985

McCoy, 167 W.Va. 59 , 278 S.E.2d 357 (1981), we held that the custody of a very young child should be with the primary caretaker if he or she meets a minimum, objective standard of behavior which qualifies him or her as a … It is well established in this jurisdiction that the paramount and controlling factor in custody cases is the welfare and protection of the child. As a corollary to this rule, we stated in Syllabus Point 4 of Murredu v.

Deberry v. Gary

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Aug 25, 2022

immunity; and Mr. … It is well established that the Division of Corrections is an “arm” of the State of West Virginia and therefore is entitled to the same immunity from suit in federal court as the State itself. , No. 5:

State Ex Rel. Dilley v. West Virginia Public Employees Retirement System

180 W. Va. 24 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 17, 1988

County commissioners qualify as members of the legislative body of a political subdivision. … Although the statutes could have been drafted more clearly, the result the legislature sought to achieve appears to be to include local school boards within the retirement system.

State v. Kennedy

205 W. Va. 224 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 25, 1999

In addition to the above, the trial court found significant the fact that “Church qualified his testimony several times by stating that he has a poor memory.” … Tonya Kennedy qualified as an unavailable witness as she invoked her Fifth Amendment privilege at the October 15, 1997, hearing. See W.Va.R.Evid. 804(a). 25 .

Beverlin v. Beverlin

29 W. Va. 732 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1887

But if - we admit its credibility it falls far short of establishing any actual contract of marriage. … It qualifies these words by provisions which would be wholly useless and unnecessary, if it were intended and should be held that the preceding provisions are simply directory.

State v. Dietz

182 W. Va. 544 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 8, 1990

“Whether a witness is qualified to state an opinion is a matter which rests within the discretion of the trial court and its ruling on that point will not ordinarily be disturbed unless it clearly appears that its discretion … However, the record fails to establish the harm caused by the circuit court’s exclusion of evidence attempting to show that the victim was the aggressor.

Timothy Robertson v. Brooke County Commission

Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · Oct 28, 2024

We agree and conclude that the Board was not clearly wrong in its decision. … Robertson’s TTD benefits, to qualify for TTD benefits, a claimant must be unable to return to employment because of a compensable injury.

Lucas v. Western Regional Jail

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 22, 2021

Additionally, Defendants posit that they are entitled to qualified immunity as Lucas does not allege that they violated any clearly established law. (Id. at 7–8). … 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