Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
13 West Virginia opinions name it 1 courts 2005–2026 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by West Virginia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Davis v. Mound View Health Care, Inc.green2 sentences2024Va. 28 , 640 S.E.2d 91 (2006) (“Where a medical malpractice action is dismissed for failure to comply with the pre-suit notice of claim provision set forth in W. 2022Va. 28 , 640 S.E.2d 91 (2006), we held that “where a medical malpractice action is dismissed for failure to comply with the pre-suit notice of claim provision set forth in W. | 1 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in West Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hinchman v. Gillette
green
2 sentences2026The requirement of a pre-suit notice of claim and screening certificate of merit is not intended to restrict or deny citizens’ access to the courts.” Syllabus Point 2, Hinchman v. Gillette, 217 W. 2006We also stressed in Hinchman that "[t]he requirement of a pre-suit notice of claim and screening certificate of merit is not intended to restrict or deny citizens' access to the courts." Id., Syl. | 11 | 2005–2026 |
Elmore v. Triad Hospitals, Inc.
green
2 sentences2015In syllabus point four of Elmore v. Triad Hospitals, Inc., 220 W.Va. 154 , 640 S.E.2d 217 (2006), we determined that “[t]he requirement of a pre-suit notice of claim and screening certificate of merit is not intended to restrict or deny citizens’ access to the courts.” (citation omitted). 2015In syllabus point four of Elmore v. Triad Hospitals, Inc., 220 W.Va. 154 , 640 S.E.2d 217 (2006), we determined that “[t]he requirement of a pre-suit notice of claim and screening certificate of merit is not intended to restrict or deny citizens’ access to the courts.” (citation omitted). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.