Case law

Julian Lee Green v. Christopher Hood, Chief Shawn Schwertfeger, Officer Mitchell, and Officer Miller

Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · Jul 30, 2024

Green did not allege that the Respondents knowingly violated any clearly established law or otherwise acted maliciously and therefore were entitled to qualified immunity; Mr. … Hood was entitled to prosecutorial immunity; Mr. Hood was entitled to statutory immunity; Mr.

Skundor v. McBride

280 F. Supp. 2d 524 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 10, 2003

The second question is whether the right alleged to have been violated was a “clearly established ... right[ ] of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v. … The court explained: A defendant is entitled to summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity when there is no genuine issue of material fact, and when the undisputed facts establish that the defendant is entitled to

Roland F. Chalifoux, Jr., D.O., individually and Roland F. Chalifoux, Jr., D.O., PLLC d/b/a Valley Pain Management Clinic v. West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, West Virginia Bureau of Public Health, Letitia Tierney, M.D., J.D., individually and in her former capacity as West Virginia Commissioner and State Health Officer, West Virginia Board of Osteopathic Medicine, and Diana Shepard, individually and in her capacity as Executive Director for the West Virginia Board of Osteophatic Medicine

West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 26, 2023

As such, he identifies no clearly established right or law violated by the DHHR defendants. … In attempting to articulate how his claim evades qualified immunity, Chalifoux on the one hand chastises Dr.

Gina Young, Administratrix v. Apogee Coal Co.

232 W. Va. 554 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 6, 2013

qualifying employers.1 West Virginia Code § 23-2-6a (1949) extends the same immunity to a variety of natural persons through whom the employer acts: “The immunity from liability set out in the preceding section [§23-2-6 … As is well-established, however, that immunity is stripped to the extent that a workplace injury or death is inflicted with “deliberate intent.” W. Va.

Bartram v. Wolfe

152 F. Supp. 2d 898 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 12, 2001

Defendant Wolfe has asserted the defense of qualified immunity. … Defendant also asserts the defense of qualified immunity. (Id., at 15.)

O'DELL v. Town of Gauley Bridge

188 W. Va. 596 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 24, 1992

immunity: unless the legislature has clearly provided for immunity under the circumstances, the general *609 common-law goal of compensating injured parties for damages caused by negligent acts must prevail.” 186 W.Va. at … “Whether the qualified tort immunity provisions of W.Va.Code § 29-12A-5(a)(ll), providing immunity for any claim covered by any workers' compensation law or employer's liability law, violates the 'equal protection’ provisions

Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Robert J. and Billye S. Front, etc.

231 W. Va. 518 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 19, 2013

Prince George’s County, Md., 309 F.3d 224 , 229 (4th Cir.2002) (“Because qualified immunity is an immunity from having to litigate, as contrasted with an immunity from liability, it is effectively lost if a case is erroneously … Traditional appellate review of a qualified immunity ruling cannot achieve the intended goal of an immunity ruling: “the right not to be subject to the burden of trial.” Hutchison [v.

Cabell County Commission and Beth Thompson v. Joseph Whitt

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 19, 2019

Code § 29-12A-1 to -18 (2018), nor entitled to qualified immunity. … Second, Jarvis did not establish some sort of bright-line rule permitting review of any interlocutory issues contained in the same order granting or denying an immunity issue.

Billy Shaffer v. City of South Charleston

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 6, 2015

This Court has clearly articulated that a political subdivision is immune from liability if a loss or claim results from the execution or enforcement of the lawful orders of any court regardless of whether … [the West Virginia Governmental Tort Claims and Insurance Reform Act], is entitled to qualified immunity from personal liability for official acts if the involved conduct did not violate clearly established

Brodnik v. Lanham

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 30, 2018

The defense of qualified immunity shields a government official from liability for civil monetary damages if the officer's conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … Qualified immunity is applicable unless the official's conduct violated a clearly established constitutional right. Pearson v. Callahan, 129 S.

Zelenka v. City of Weirton

208 W. Va. 243 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 20, 2000

The requirements of O’Dell are clearly present in the instant case. … We decline so to do. 11 The Legislature has clearly provided for immunity under the facts of this ease.

Clark v. Milam

847 F. Supp. 424 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 15, 1994

Although not specifically addressing whether an attorney may withhold work product from a client created during and for the representation of that client, the Duplan Court recognized that, “[the] qualified immunity of work … question whether upon the termination of litigation the work product documents prepared incident thereto lose the qualified immunity extended to them under Rule 26(b)(3), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and become freely

Cook v. Board of Educ. for Logan County

671 F. Supp. 1110 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Oct 19, 1987

The basis of their motion is the doctrine of qualified immunity. A. … That immunity, they concede, is not absolute, but rather, is qualified. In Wood v.

Neiswonger v. Hennessey

89 F. Supp. 2d 766 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Feb 25, 2000

be entitled ta qualified immunity. … The Fourth Circuit has divided the analysis of qualified immunity into three parts: “First, we must identify the right allegedly violated; second, we must decide whether the right was clearly established at the time of the

State ex rel. Town of Pratt v. Stucky

229 W. Va. 700 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 24, 2012

This Court has specifically stated that “[t]he ultimate determination of whether qualified or statutory immunity bars a civil action is one of law for the court to determine. … Therefore, unless there is a bona fide dispute as to the foundational or historical facts that underlie the immunity determination, the ultimate questions of statutory or qualified immunity are ripe for summary disposition

Braxton v. Matthews

865 F. Supp. 345 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Oct 19, 1994

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Next, the Court must examine whether Defendant is protected from suit by the doctrine of qualified immunity. In Wiley v. … if the officer’s ‘conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’

Simmons v. Charleston Housing Authority

881 F. Supp. 225 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 22, 1995

Defendants assert they are entitled to qualified immunity from this lawsuit because the “right” asserted by Plaintiffs was not clearly established at the time the right was allegedly deprived. … Qualified immunity from civil damages is granted to state actors who do “not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” (emphasis added). Harlow v.

McDerment v. Browning

18 F. Supp. 2d 622 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 21, 1998

Next, the Court must determine whether the right was clearly established at the time of the incident. … Final resolution of the question of qualified immunity thus depends on a factual determination of what actually happened.

Julian Lee Green v. Officer B. Hoehn, Officer C. Castilow, Chief Shawn Schwertfeger, and Christopher Hood

Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · Jul 30, 2024

The circuit court went on to conclude that all Respondents were entitled to qualified immunity; Mr. Hood was entitled to prosecutorial immunity; Mr. Hood was statutorily immune; Mr. … It is well established in West Virginia that “[a] circuit court’s entry of summary judgment is reviewed de novo.” Syl. Pt. 1, Painter v. Peavy, 192 W. Va. 189, 190, 451 S.E.2d 755, 756 (1994).

State v. Kelly Messer

99 W. Va. 241 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 26, 1925

The juror Atkinson was clearly incompetent. … Under that ruling we think the juror Thomas was clearly competent; but it in no wise sustains the contention of the State that the juror Atkinson was also qualified. (2) H. H.