Case law

SER Justin S. Golden, Sr. v. Hon. Tod J. Kaufman, Judge

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 16, 2014

I write separately to express my displeasure with the majority’s foray into waters clearly reserved for legislative action. … By its use of prohibition to alter long-established common law, rather than as a means to enforce and uphold existing law, the majority acted in a manner that was highly irregular and clearly unwarranted.3

Brent D. Benjamin v. Elizabeth D. Walker

237 W. Va. 181 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Apr 19, 2016

The contrary conclusions of the court below were clearly erroneous. … It is well established that there are “certain circumstances in which an agency may perform a function that is implied, but not specifically permitted, by statute…,” and that an agency’s authority includes “’such other

Shroades Ex Rel. Shroades v. Henry

187 W. Va. 723 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 22, 1992

However when the by-laws do not clearly indicate that peer review is a function of the committee, the party asserting the privilege has the burden of presenting additional information. … The by-laws do not clearly specify if the special committee and the medical staff committee are “review organizations.”

William Douglas Witten v. Joshua Butcher

238 W. Va. 323 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 30, 2016

The statute clearly and unambiguously requires voters to sign the poll book prior to being given a ballot. … This measurement establishes the restricted “no electioneering” area from the polling place.

Mark W. Matkovich, State Tax Comm. v. University Healthcare Foundation, Inc.

238 W. Va. 345 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 11, 2016

For purposes of determining whether a qualifying charitable organization under 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) has established the exclusive, or primary and immediate, charitable use required for seeking ad valorem tax … property clearly falls within the exception.

Swinburn v. Smith

15 W. Va. 483 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 25, 1879

as such clerk, there being when he qualified no controversy pending by which his right to this office was disputed. … Gillison could only be extended by the failure of his successor to be elected and qualified.

State v. Blevins

131 W. Va. 350 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 23, 1948

Therein it was said: “The system established by the Constitution and laws of West Virginia (Const. … No privilege or immunity is denied such former owner, or those claiming under him or acting for him.

Pasquale v. Ohio Power Co.

187 W. Va. 292 · West Virginia Supreme Court · May 15, 1992

Clearly, the future wage loss accruing after the jury verdict is not a prejudgment loss or “special damage” under W.Va.Code, 56-6-31. … They allowed a man to proceed with work without the qualifying person, their authoritative supervisor on the spot.

Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Rose

177 W. Va. 20 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 12, 1986

The appellee, Ashland, is a Kentucky corporation qualified to do business in West Virginia. It is an integrated oil company engaged in a wide variety of business enterprises. … “It is well established that reliance interests weigh heavily in the shaping of an appropriate equitable remedy.” 411 U.S. at 203 , 93 S.Ct. at 1471 .

State Ex Rel. Myers v. Hodge

129 W. Va. 820 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Mar 18, 1947

We have noted that defendant Hodge testified that the place of salé was incorporated in the notices posted by him, but the stipulation of the parties establishes a different situation. … Clearly under the notice of sale incorporated in this record, the place of sale was not set forth or indicated.

Barger v. Hood

87 W. Va. 78 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Oct 5, 1920

The legislature evidently contemplated that juries were better qualified to determine what language would be insulting to a gentleman’s moral sensibilities than the judges who, because of their habits of thought, may acquire … If it is the intention to charge a single publication in which all of the parties engaged, and which was the result of their joint action, the language can be made to clearly express this purpose; or if, on the other hand

Potomac Comprehensive Diagnostic & Guidance Center, Inc., aka Potomac Center, Inc. v. L.K., By Her Guardian and Conservator, Kelly Young, and D.S., By His Guardian and Conservator, Kelly Young

West Virginia Supreme Court · Jun 5, 2024

THE POTOMAC CENTER, https://www.potomaccenter.com (last visited June 4, 2024).1 For purposes of the express language of the statute, it clearly “offers its services[] . . . to the general public[.]” W. Va. … Nor can the “screening” at issue here be distinguished from other establishments this Court has declared “place[s] of public accommodations.”

Webb v. Fury

282 S.E.2d 28 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Sep 10, 1981

"[A] publicity campaign to influence governmental action falls clearly into the category of political activity." Noerr, supra, 365 U.S. at 140-141 , 81 S.Ct. at 531 , 5 L.Ed.2d at 473 . … The majority appears to establish blanket immunity for false publications, even if published with the knowledge that the statements are false, and blanket immunity for tortious interference with business activity so long

Handley v. Union Carbide Corp.

620 F. Supp. 428 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Oct 17, 1985

The statute clearly requires “a commonly accepted and well-known safety standard within the industry.” … The spraying of the silicon tetrachloride spills with water, not being found to involve intentional exposure, or for that matter to be a specific unsafe working condition, does not qualify for consideration as to causation

Blackhurst v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.

294 F. Supp. 128 · District Court, S.D. West Virginia · Mar 22, 1968

Here again, the record shows quite clearly that the plaintiff, along with others in a similar posture and with comparable periods of past service, was considered for re-employment in compliance with the established practice … After giving the plaintiff’s application such consideration, it was concluded that he was not qualified for re-employment.

Dolen v. St. Mary's Hospital of Huntington, Inc.

203 W. Va. 181 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 17, 1998

We have previously held that: 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 … The standard for granting summary judgment was established in Syllabus Point 3 of Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Federal Ins.

State Ex Rel. Erie Insurance Property & Casualty Co. v. Mazzone

220 W. Va. 525 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jul 25, 2007

However, the Court in Hickman made clear that the work-product doctrine provides qualified and not absolute immunity from disclosure. … The work product doctrine provides a qualified immunity to two categories of work products: fact and opinion. See In re Markle, 174 W.Va. at 556-57 , 328 S.E.2d at 163 .

Ex parte Hunter

2 W. Va. 122 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1867

All these privileges and immunities are conferred by the law for the public good, and are, therefore, held and enjoyed in subordination to the public control. … Clearly it may do as much.

In Re Appeal of Prezkop

154 W. Va. 759 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1971

The first witness called by the city was Prezkop, whereupon his counsel objected to the city using Prezkop as a witness *766 upon the ground of constitutional immunity. … Goodwin, I don’t think any criminal charges arising out of the fire, whether they be arson, neglect or anything else, should be discussed until we establish something by thorough investigation.

Bohrer v. City Hospital, Inc.

681 F. Supp. 2d 657 · District Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jan 7, 2010

The FSHCAA which was legislatively enacted in 1992, was clearly established by the 2000 to 2003 time frame. There has never been a requirement that the Government provide notice of federal employees’ status. … There is no Government regulation or policy issuance that establishes such a duty.