Case law

Jeffrey v. West Virginia Department of Public Safety, Division of Corrections

204 W. Va. 41 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 11, 1998

In Jeffrey I, we stated: Section 319 establishes a duty. Assuming breach of that duty, there is negligence. Having established negligence, however, liability does not automatically ensue. … The requirements of the “special relationship” exception have been clearly set out in Syllabus Point 12 of Parkulo v. Board of Probation and Parole, supra. Therefore, we decline to alter Parkulo .

State ex rel. Patrick v. County Court of Hancock County

152 W. Va. 592 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Feb 4, 1969

The election returns and the poll books clearly show that Carole A. … This procedure in such case was clearly stated in State ex rel. Simon v.

Hartman v. Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd.

789 F. Supp. 2d 701 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Apr 29, 2011

Our court of appeals lays a “heavy burden” upon a defendant removing a case on such grounds: “In order to establish that a nondiverse defendant has been fraudulently joined, the removing party must establish either: [t]hat … The best way to advance this objective is to accept the parties [as] joined ... unless joinder is clearly improper.

Hoback v. Cox

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · May 11, 2020

Qualified Immunity Defendant Cox also argues she is entitled to qualified immunity. In her briefs, she focuses her argument on her Fourth Amendment claim in Count One. … The Fourth Circuit recognized that West Virginia law “affords immunity ‘from personal liability for official acts if the involved conduct did not violate clearly established laws of which a reasonable official would have

Lott v. Drain

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Jul 15, 2025

Additionally, it would appear that these Defendants also enjoy at least qualified immunity from the Plaintiff’s claims. … Qualified immunity shields public officials from personal liability for performance of their official duties, provided that they do not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

State Ex Rel. AT & T Mobility, LLC v. Wilson

226 W. Va. 572 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 28, 2010

an expansion of our jurisprudence, that decision did not alter the legal underpinnings necessary to establish unconscionability. … In Dunlap, we identified in generalized terms the types of provisions contained in an adhesion contract that may qualify as unfair for purposes of uneonseionability.

Mauck v. City of Martinsburg

167 W. Va. 332 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 7, 1981

Dunworth’s letter to Mauck clearly falls within the protection of a qualified privilege. As city manager, Dunworth was responsible for the hiring, supervision and dismissal of city employees. … Affirmed. 1 The trial court’s order does not clearly grant a judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the insulting words claim.

Savilla v. Speedway Superamerica, LLC

219 W. Va. 758 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Dec 27, 2006

Moschgat qualified as administratrix of her mother’s estate before the Kanawha County Commission. On April 11, 2000, in her capacity as personal representative and administratrix of Ms. Kannaird’s estate, Ms. … Kannaird's challenge to the circuit court's order established the "law of the case,” and bars Speedway from asserting the arguments that are discussed in the instant opinion. We cannot agree with Ms.

Roney v. Gencorp

431 F. Supp. 2d 622 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · May 9, 2006

The immunity afforded employers is not easily lost. … Dismissal is also not warranted for the claims asserted against Gencorp in Counts IIIV for the reasons argued in Gencorp’s motion relating to the immunity established by § 23-4-2. 2 Employers are provided immunity from all

Michael Ex Rel. Michael v. Appalachian Heating, LLC

226 W. Va. 394 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 11, 2010

The Plaintiffs further assert that there is nothing in the UTPA that supports granting insurance companies immunity from the Human Rights Act. … Clearly, then, W.

Ali v. Raleigh County

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 29, 2018

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “[g]overnmental officials performing discretionary functions are shielded from liability for money damages so long ‘as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Conspiring together to initiate this scheme against the Plaintiff in a malicious and retaliatory manner violates clearly established constitutional rights, and the Defendants’ qualified immunity defense should be denied

Kiser v. Caudill

215 W. Va. 403 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 8, 2004

Barnes clearly contradicted his *411 deposition testimony. Contrary to Ms. Kiser’s contentions, Dr. … As this Court explained in Kiser I, “ ‘[T]o qualify a witness as an expert on [the] standard of care, the party offering the witness must establish that the witness has more than a casual familiarity with the standard of

Mandolidis v. Elkins Industries, Inc.

161 W. Va. 695 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1978

Notwithstanding the immunity from corn- *698 mon law suit granted to employers by W.Va. Code § 23-2-6, 1 plaintiffs commenced their actions relying on the deliberate intent exception to such immunity contained in W.Va. … Certainly this does not establish intentional injury.

Cottrell v. Stepp

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 12, 2019

a clearly established law or constitutional duty.” … Therefore, in determining whether qualified immunity applies, the principal inquiry is whether a public official’s conduct “violate[s] clearly established laws of which a reasonable official would have known” or is “fraudulent

State Ex Rel. Lawhead v. County Court of Kanawha County

129 W. Va. 167 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 23, 1946

A person who is not registered is not entitled to vote, although qualified. Section 3, Permanent Registration Law. … Clearly this imposes a duty on a voter not authorized or contemplated.

Miller v. Rubenstein

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Feb 6, 2018

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity “shields executive officers ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Lastly, Defendant Allen argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity because no clearly established right of Miller’s was violated. (See id.)

State v. Carney

222 W. Va. 152 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 25, 2008

Johnson, 134 W.Va. 357 , 59 S.E.2d 485 (1950), this Court examined the statutory terms “forcibly or illegally” and stated that such terms as “used in the statute clearly mean any unlawful interference with the officer in … After being offered immunity from state prosecution, Ms. Boseman gave yet another statement to the police on August 18, 2005; that statement contains no reference to Appellants. 19 .

West Virginia Human Rights Commission v. Esquire Group, Inc.

217 W. Va. 454 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 30, 2005

immunity.”); Banks v. … Black resides in the home but no longer qualifies as handicapped under the statute.

Liebau v. Tibbs

District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Feb 14, 2025

The Defendant concedes that use of OC spray against a compliant inmate who poses no threat, as alleged, is a violation of clearly established law. … In addition, he argues that WVDCR is not entitled to qualified immunity because the conduct was within the scope of employment, but clearly unlawful based on precedent regarding unnecessary use of OC spray.

Joseph Mulla v. Ryanne Ball

Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia · Feb 3, 2026

Mulla’s claims through the doctrines of prosecutorial and qualified immunity. … Ball was entitled to prosecutorial and qualified immunity, as well as statutory immunity pursuant to West Virginia Code § 29-12A-5(b) (1986) (granting immunity to employees of political subdivisions) and West Virginia Code