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.
12 West Virginia opinions name it 2 courts 2003–2024 7 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 |
|---|---|---|
Miller v. Hattongreen1 sentence2024Va. 765, 769 , 403 S.E.2d 782, 786 (1991), the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia concluded that the appellants’ failure “to introduce specific evidence in opposition to ... [the movant’s] motion for summary judgment undermines their claim that summary judgment was improperly granted.” Here, Mr. Green failed to respond to the motions for summary judgment, failed to introduce, or even allege, specific evidence in opposition to Respondents’ motion for summary judgment, and on appeal, Mr. Green does not assert that the circuit court erred in concluding that his claims were barred by the im | 1 | 1 |
Hannah v. Heetergreen2 sentences2021Nevertheless, the legislative intent remains. 20 While the resolution of the motion to dismiss these claims is not properly before the Court, whether these claims fall under the purview of the MPLA is properly before us, and analyzing whether a negligent spoliation claim falls under the purview of the MPLA is a pointless academic exercise when the cause of action does not exist in this State. 4 This State does, however, recognize the tort of intentional spoliation and Respondents’ claim does not even begin to set forth the elements required in proving that claim. 5 4 Syl. pt. 2, Hannah v. Heet 2021Va. 704 , 584 S.E.2d 560 (2003) (“West Virginia does not recognize spoliation of evidence as a stand-alone tort when the spoliation is the result of the negligence of a party to a civil action.”). | 1 | 1 |
Pearsall v. Richmond Redevelopment & Housing Authoritygreen1 sentence2019In Pearsall v. Richmond Redevelopment & Housing Authority, 242 S.E.2d 228, 230 (Va. 1978), the Supreme Court of Virginia 7 discussed the practical effects of claiming damages for At the hearing on Respondents’ motion for the trial court to take judicial notice of the date as January 1, 2003, Respondents argued that the Rapps and the Pifers were in the same position for a number of years because DOH had publically announced its public project plans but delayed for years before filing the petitions. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Davisgreen2 sentences2013See syl. pt. 5, State v. Davis, 140 W.Va. 153 , 83 S.E.2d 114 (1954) ("In fixing the duration of possession, a person has the right to tack to his possession the possession of those under whom he claims.”). 4 .According to testimony at trial, the wedge machine or wedge mill cut timber into slats of a certain size, and these slats were used in coal mines to secure the tops of posts against the mine ceiling. 5 . 2013See syl. pt. 5, State v. Davis, 140 W.Va. 153 , 83 S.E.2d 114 (1954) ("In fixing the duration of possession, a person has the right to tack to his possession the possession of those under whom he claims.”). 4 .According to testimony at trial, the wedge machine or wedge mill cut timber into slats of a certain size, and these slats were used in coal mines to secure the tops of posts against the mine ceiling. 5 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in West Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ron King v. Richard J. and Lorinda J. Nease
green
2 sentences2021The circuit court concluded that West Virginia Code § 29B-1-3(e) allowed the clerk’s office to “establish fees reasonable [sic] calculated to reimburse it for its actual cost” in reproducing records, that this Court’s holding in King v. Nease 6 permitted the clerk’s office to “impose a search or retrieval fee in conjunction with a [FOIA] request,” 7 and that West Virginia Code § 59-1-11(b)(2) allows the clerk’s office to charge one dollar per page “for transcripts, copies, and papers made by the clerk for use in any other court or otherwise to go out of the office[.]” This appeal followed. 6 2 2021The circuit court concluded that West Virginia Code § 29B-1-3(e) allowed the clerk’s office to “establish fees reasonable [sic] calculated to reimburse it for its actual cost” in reproducing records, that this Court’s holding in King v. Nease 6 permitted the clerk’s office to “impose a search or retrieval fee in conjunction with a [FOIA] request,” 7 and that West Virginia Code § 59-1-11(b)(2) allows the clerk’s office to charge one dollar per page “for transcripts, copies, and papers made by the clerk for use in any other court or otherwise to go out of the office[.]” This appeal followed. 6 2 | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Moats v. Preston County Commission
green
2 sentences2003Because this Court recently held in Moats v. Preston County Commission, 206 W.Va. 8 , 521 S.E.2d 180 (1999), that a verbal order enunciating a court's ruling is as effective as if said ruling had been memorialized in a written order, the respondents claim that the documents which Mr. Brooks seeks to use in his medical malpractice action against Dr. Wahi and CAMC are sealed, protected from disclosure, and unavailable to him. 2003Because this Court recently held in Moats v. Preston County Commission, 206 W.Va. 8 , 521 S.E.2d 180 (1999), that a verbal order enunciating a court's ruling is as effective as if said ruling had been memorialized in a written order, the respondents claim that the documents which Mr. Brooks seeks to use in his medical malpractice action against Dr. Wahi and CAMC are sealed, protected from disclosure, and unavailable to him. | 2 | 2003–2021 |
Findley v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
green
1 sentence2024In reaching this conclusion, the circuit court applied the traditional test for standing adopted by this Court in Syllabus point 5 of Findley v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 213 W. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Fayette County National Bank v. Lilly
green
2 sentences2022Lilly, 199 W. 2022Lilly, 199 W. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Triangle Industries, Inc.
green
1 sentence2022Va. 580 , 390 S.E.2d 562 (1990). ii ARMSTEAD, J.: Petitioner State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (hereinafter “State Farm”), appeals the Circuit Court of Ohio County’s December 21, 2020 Order granting Respondents’ motion for partial summary judgment. 1 On appeal, State Farm argues that the circuit court erred in finding coverage for a bat infestation under a Rental Dwelling Policy it issued to Respondent Nathaniel Realty. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Clark v. Druckman
green
2 sentences2013Pt. 3, Clark v. Druckman, 218 W.Va. 427 , 624 S.E.2d 864 (2005) (“The litigation privilege is generally applicable to bar a civil litigant’s claim for civil damages against an opposing party’s attorney if the alleged act of the attorney occurs in the course of the attorney’s representation of an opposing party and is conduct related to the civil action.”). 2 Respondents assert that the circuit court addressed each of petitioner’s allegations and applied various aspects of the law to show that petitioner’s action was ripe for dismissal. 2013Pt. 3, Clark v. Druckman, 218 W.Va. 427 , 624 S.E.2d 864 (2005) (“The litigation privilege is generally applicable to bar a civil litigant’s claim for civil damages against an opposing party’s attorney if the alleged act of the attorney occurs in the course of the attorney’s representation of an opposing party and is conduct related to the civil action.”). 2 Respondents assert that the circuit court addressed each of petitioner’s allegations and applied various aspects of the law to show that petitioner’s action was ripe for dismissal. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Garlow v. Zakaib
green
2 sentences2006They maintain that when faced with a motion to disqualify, this Court has noted that such an objection "should be viewed with caution, however, for it can be misused as a technique for harassment." Garlow v. Zakaib, 186 W.Va. 457, 461 , 413 S.E.2d 112 , S.E.2d 112, 116 (1991). 2006They maintain that when faced with a motion to disqualify, this Court has noted that such an objection "should be viewed with caution, however, for it can be misused as a technique for harassment." Garlow v. Zakaib, 186 W.Va. 457, 461 , 413 S.E.2d 112 , S.E.2d 112, 116 (1991). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
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.