Case law

State of West Virginia v. Randall Lewis Utt

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 26, 2024

At the end of jury selection, the court asked if there were any objections to qualifying the jury panel, and the petitioner’s counsel noted his previous objection. … The State responded that the “short outburst” was not something that would taint the whole jury and was insufficient to support not qualifying the jury.

Estate of Wayne A. Jones v. The City of Martinsburg

West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 30, 2020

immunity grounds. … immunity in petitioner’s civil action.

State v. Cook

175 W. Va. 185 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1985

Unquestionably, the evidence submitted clearly demonstrated the appellant’s intellectual deficiency. … He cannot reasonably claim that the Fifth Amendment gives him not only this choice but, if he elects to testify, an immunity from cross-examination on the *196 matters he has himself put in dispute.

Ingersoll-Rand Financial Corp. v. 5-Leaf Clover Corp. (In Re 5-Leaf Clover Corp.)

66 A.L.R. Fed. 497 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 3, 1980

Nonetheless, the evidence established that the Debtors did have some equity in the equipment. … Ingersoll-Rand offered testimony to establish a depreciation rate of 2.2%, or approximately $25,000 per month.

Lockhart v. Washington County Child Support Enforcement Agency

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jun 24, 2021

Material facts are those which are necessary to establish a cause of action. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). … In 1992, the Supreme Court in Nordic Village held that § 106 of the Bankruptcy Code did not establish an unequivocal textual waiver necessary to avoid the government’s sovereign immunity in bankruptcy proceedings. 503

Ivery v. Correctional Officer Keys

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Apr 4, 2024

. § 1983 and that WVDCR is entitled to qualified immunity to the extent that “[p]laintiff is also alleging that WVDCR was negligent in supervising [Keys].” WVDCR Mot. 4. … Defendant’s argument that plaintiff failed to state a claim of negligent supervision of defendant Keys and the Does because WVDCR is entitled to qualified immunity is not relevant inasmuch

Layne v. Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co.

66 W. Va. 607 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 23, 1909

Is the right of a passenger to immunity from intentional injury at the hands of the servants of the carrier within this principle ? It seems so. … As we have said his employment by the company was established, though it was indirectly procured through the detective agency.

Hansford v. Chesapeake Coal Co.

22 W. Va. 70 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 7, 1883

But, as the specification of an exact quantity without any qualifying words, renders the deed ambiguous as to whether it was or was not intended by the parties that 'the vendor, by such positive affirmation, undertook to … This evidence, which has been herein-before fully stated, in my judgment, not only fails to rebut the presumption of a sale in gross arising from the face of the deed, but it clearly establishes the fact that it was intended

Wood v. West Virginia Public Employees Retirement System

191 W. Va. 484 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 8, 1994

Wood’s admission that he made application for the position as prison doctor in July 1972, clearly establish that he could not have been an employee of the West Virginia Division of Corrections (“corrections”) prior to July … Wood did not meet his burden of establishing a clear right to the relief sought. See Syl.Pt. 3, Halstead, 182 W.Va. at 696 , 391 S.E.2d at 386 . Specifically, *488 Dr.

ELCO Mechanical Contractors, Inc. v. Builders Supply Ass'n

832 F. Supp. 1054 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Oct 6, 1993

MEWAs which are also EWBPs qualify for limited preemption from certain state insurance regulations; the extent of the preemption depends on whether the MEWA is “fully insured.” 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (b)(6)(A). … Clearly, ELCO and BSA’s other members had no involvement in the day-to-day administration of the plan.

Jones v. West Virginia Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Apr 16, 2024

Defendants requested qualified immunity for all of Jones’s claims about the three WRJ policies. See Def.’s Mem. at 13; Def.’s Reply at 4. … In her PF&R, the Magistrate Judge recommends qualified immunity be granted on these claims. See PF&R at 23–25. Jones did not object to this recommendation.

Goodman v. Searls, Superintendent

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 19, 2021

“In the West Virginia courts, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are to be governed by the two-pronged test established in Strickland v. … Goodman focuses on one still frame photo taken from one of the toll booth videos that he believes most clearly depicts that “as [Ms.

Mark V.H. v. Dolores J.M.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 13, 2015

The family court stated that the increase in petitioner’s parenting time was because of petitioner’s regular therapy sessions with a qualified mental health professional. … We determine that the family court did not clearly err in finding that petitioner did not demonstrate a substantial change in circumstances.

Scott ex rel. McNeely v. Taco Bell Corp.

892 F. Supp. 142 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 11, 1995

The Supreme Court of Appeals qualified this holding in both Miller and Jack , however, noting: there are circumstances which may give rise to such a duty, and these circumstances will be determined by this Court on a case-by-case … West, 191 W.Va. 366 , 445 S.E.2d 753 (1994) (per curiam) (when store employees attempt to pursue a bolting shoplifter, the pursuit may constitute negligence). *145 Together, these cases demonstrate clearly that there is no

State Ex Rel. Maloney v. McCartney

159 W. Va. 513 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1976

In Dunn Tennessee had not established a sufficient relationship between its interest in an informed electorate and the fixed durational residency requirement. In the case of Thompson v. … The Governor makes numerous other arguments based upon linguistics in an effort to establish ambiguity in Art. VII, § 4.

Saundra J. v. Robert S.

West Virginia Supreme Court · Feb 15, 2019

The family court held a status conference in January of 2017.2 The family court reasoned that no further litigation was necessary in the matter because the prior order established a parenting plan and set forth respondent … “To determine whether a state qualifies as a child’s ‘home state’ for purposes of determining initial jurisdiction under W. Va.

Slater v. Varney

68 S.E.2d 757 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Feb 18, 1952

shall be eligible to the Legislature or to any office of honor, trust, or profit in this State, until he shall have duly accounted for and paid over such money according to law, when read and considered together, indicate clearly … Clearly it provides only a conditional ineligibility of a contestee, who has received a majority of the votes cast in an election, to hold office.

State ex rel. Grant County Commission v. Judge Nelson

West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 23, 2021

So, that allegation clearly survives the Commission’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion. … 21 And second, the majority, without seeking guidance from the parties, goes on to decide the issue that it specifically found was not before us, and confidently decrees that even if the Commission qualifies

King v. Heffernan

214 W. Va. 835 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 3, 2003

Under the 1998 amendments to Rule 15(c)(3) of the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure, before a plaintiff may amend a complaint to add a new defendant, it must be established that the newly-added defendant (1) received … Clearly, the purpose behind the exclusivity of W.Va.Code § 14-2-2’s requirement that lawsuits against the governor, other state officers or state agencies be brought in the Circuit Court of Kana-wha County, the circuit court

Zeng v. Marshall University

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 26, 2019

For example, to establish that a defendant violated 42 U.S.C. § 1981 by terminating a contract, the power to terminate the contract—and thus a contractual relationship—must still be established. … Thus, while seeking reinstatement may qualify as prospective injunctive relief,3 Defendant MU is nonetheless still immune from suit because it is not an “official,” as required by Ex parte Young.