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.
9 West Virginia opinions name it 2 courts 1879–2025 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Carol Kinsinger v. Todd Pethelgreen2 sentences2025Here, the family court provided a thorough analysis and determined that (1) Husband presented no evidence to suggest that relevant evidence was 6 The doctrine of laches is “an equity doctrine to the effect that unreasonable delay will bar a claim if the delay is a prejudice to the defendant.” Kinsinger v. Pethel, 234 W. 2024Specifically, Father argues that: (1) a simple reading of West Virginia Code § 48-24-104(a) makes it clear that it applies when the respondent is the father, but here, Father was the petitioner in the family court proceedings; and (2) Mother missed her opportunity to file for support and should have been barred from it due to the doctrine of laches.8 We disagree and conclude that Father’s 8 The doctrine of laches is “an equity doctrine to the effect that unreasonable delay will bar a claim if the delay is a prejudice to the defendant.” Kinsinger v. Pethel, 234 W. | 3 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in West Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hursey v. Hursey
neutral
1 sentence1936Hursey v. Hursey, 56 W. | 1 | 1936–1936 |
Grove v. Judy
neutral
1 sentence1935Grove v. Judy, 24 W. | 1 | 1935–1935 |
State Ex Rel. E. I. Dupont De Nemours & Co. v. Coda
green
1 sentence1929It is true that the practice pursued by claimants was followed in the case of State ex rel. v. Coda, 103 W. | 1 | 1929–1929 |
Chenoweth v. Pacific Express Co.
neutral
1 sentence1925In Chenoweth v. Pacific Express Co., 93 Mo. App. 185 , it was decided that a complete performance of a contract by the promisee forecloses the promisor from interposing the statute of frauds as a defense, and the equity doctrine of part performance has no place in an action at law; also that mutual and concurrent promises may be a consideration for each other, and the fact that one is executory makes it none the less binding. | 1 | 1925–1925 |
Smalley v. Greene
neutral
1 sentence1925And a court of very high repute says: “The provision of the statute of frauds respecting contracts not to be performed within a year applies only to contracts not to be performed on either side within that time.” Smalley v. Green, 52 Iowa, 241 . | 1 | 1925–1925 |
Gracie v. The Mary'd. Ins. Comp'y
green
1 sentence1900Richards v. The Maryland, &c. 8 Cranch 84 . | 1 | 1900–1900 |
La Farge v. Herter
neutral
1 sentence1879And this right of subrogation, though originally a doctrine of equity, has become recognized as a legal right. 1 Wash. Real Prop. 575; LaFarge. v. Hester, 11 Barb. 159 . | 1 | 1879–1879 |
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.