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.
8 West Virginia opinions name it 1 courts 1996–2015 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
TXO Production Corp. v. Alliance Resources Corp.green2 sentences2014Thereafter, in TXO Production Corp. v. Alliance Resources Corp., 187 W.Va. 457, 474 , 419 S.E.2d 870, 887 (1992), this Court sought to elaborate on the Games requirement that punitive damages bear a “reasonable relationship to compensatory damages.” We noted in TXO that .the Garnes factors were created “to provide both procedural and substantive due process to defendants against whom punitive damages are awarded in accordance with the U.S. Suprerhe Court’s directive in HasliplT Id. (emphasis added). 2014Thereafter, in TXO Production Corp. v. Alliance Resources Corp., 187 W.Va. 457, 474 , 419 S.E.2d 870, 887 (1992), this Court sought to elaborate on the Games requirement that punitive damages bear a “reasonable relationship to compensatory damages.” We noted in TXO that .the Garnes factors were created “to provide both procedural and substantive due process to defendants against whom punitive damages are awarded in accordance with the U.S. Suprerhe Court’s directive in HasliplT Id. (emphasis added). | 1 | 3 |
TXO Production Corp. v. Alliance Resources Corp.green2 sentences2010We reject this argument on the simple ground that the United States Supreme Court approved of the Games factors in its review of those factors in TXO Production Corp. v. Alliance Resources Corp., 509 U.S. 443 , 113 S.Ct. 2711 , 125 L.Ed.2d 366 (1993). 2010We reject this argument on the simple ground that the United States Supreme Court approved of the Games factors in its review of those factors in TXO Production Corp. v. Alliance Resources Corp., 509 U.S. 443 , 113 S.Ct. 2711 , 125 L.Ed.2d 366 (1993). | 1 | 3 |
Quicken Loans, Inc. v. Lourie Brown and Monique Browngreen2 sentences2015See generally Quicken Loans, Inc. v. Brown, No. 13-0764, 236 W.Va. 12 , 777 S.E.2d 581 , 2014 WL 6734107 (Nov. 25,2014). 2015See generally Quicken Loans, Inc. v. Brown, No. 13-0764, 236 W.Va. 12 , 777 S.E.2d 581 , 2014 WL 6734107 (Nov. 25,2014). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Salmonsgreen2 sentences2000“Alleged errors of a constitutional magnitude will generally trigger a review by this Court under the plain error doctrine.” State v. Salmons, 203 W.Va. 561, 571 , 509 S.E.2d 842, 852, n. 13 . 2000“Alleged errors of a constitutional magnitude will generally trigger a review by this Court under the plain error doctrine.” State v. Salmons, 203 W.Va. 561, 571 , 509 S.E.2d 842, 852, n. 13 . | 1 | 1 |
Green Oil Co. v. Hornsbygreen2 sentences1997See 509 U.S. at 21-22 , 113 S.Ct. at 2473-74 (discussing criteria used by Alabama Supreme Court to determine excessiveness of punitive damages award); see generally Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby, 539 So.2d 218 (Ala.1989). . 1997See 509 U.S. at 21-22 , 113 S.Ct. at 2473-74 (discussing criteria used by Alabama Supreme Court to determine excessiveness of punitive damages award); see generally Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby, 539 So.2d 218 (Ala.1989). . | 1 | 1 |
Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmontgreen2 sentences1997Given the trial court’s exemplary employment of the Games factors to this case as discussed above, we are satisfied that the trial court properly engaged in the review required and that the facts of this case with regard to the retaliation claim support upholding the fifteen to one ratio of punitive to compensatory damages without offending due process principles. 35 The final matter which we address is Sheetz’ request that this Court expand upon our recognition in Mace v. Charleston Area Medical Center Foundation, 188 W.Va. 57 , 422 S.E.2d 624 (1992) and Dzinglski v. Weirton Steel Corp., 191 1997Given the trial court’s exemplary employment of the Games factors to this case as discussed above, we are satisfied that the trial court properly engaged in the review required and that the facts of this case with regard to the retaliation claim support upholding the fifteen to one ratio of punitive to compensatory damages without offending due process principles. 35 The final matter which we address is Sheetz’ request that this Court expand upon our recognition in Mace v. Charleston Area Medical Center Foundation, 188 W.Va. 57 , 422 S.E.2d 624 (1992) and Dzinglski v. Weirton Steel Corp., 191 | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Garnes v. Fleming Landfill, Inc.
green
2 sentences2014Accordingly, the Perrine Court restated the Games test as follows, without changing the substance of the test: When a trial or appellate court reviews an award of punitive damages for exces-siveness under Syllabus points 3 and 4 of Garnes v. Fleming Landfill, Inc., 186 W.Va. 656 , 413 S.E.2d 897 (1991), the court should first determine whether the amount of the punitive damages award is justified by aggravating evidence including, but not limited to: (1) the reprehensibility of the defendant’s conduct; (2) whether the defendant profited from the wrongful conduct; (3) the financial position of 2014Accordingly, the Perrine Court restated the Games test as follows, without changing the substance of the test: When a trial or appellate court reviews an award of punitive damages for exces-siveness under Syllabus points 3 and 4 of Garnes v. Fleming Landfill, Inc., 186 W.Va. 656 , 413 S.E.2d 897 (1991), the court should first determine whether the amount of the punitive damages award is justified by aggravating evidence including, but not limited to: (1) the reprehensibility of the defendant’s conduct; (2) whether the defendant profited from the wrongful conduct; (3) the financial position of | 5 | 1996–2014 |
Vandevender v. Sheetz, Inc.
green
2 sentences2010Subsequent to BMW, in a case styled Vandevender v. Sheetz, Inc., 200 W.Va. 591 , 490 S.E.2d 678 (1997) (per curiam), this Court reexamined the punitive damages analysis established in Garnes v. Fleming Landfill, Inc., 186 W.Va. 656 , 413 S.E.2d 897 , and concluded that the Games analysis satisfied the requirements of BMW. 2010Subsequent to BMW, in a case styled Vandevender v. Sheetz, Inc., 200 W.Va. 591 , 490 S.E.2d 678 (1997) (per curiam), this Court reexamined the punitive damages analysis established in Garnes v. Fleming Landfill, Inc., 186 W.Va. 656 , 413 S.E.2d 897 , and concluded that the Games analysis satisfied the requirements of BMW. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. Haslip
green
2 sentences2000Based upon the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Haslip, 499 U.S. 1 , 111 S.Ct. 1032 , 113 L.Ed.2d 1 (1991), establishing due process standards for punitive damage awards, 3 the Games decision establishes a process for awarding and reviewing a punitive damages issue: “Under our system for an award and review of punitive damages awards, there must be: (1) a reasonable constraint on jury discretion....” 186 W.Va. at 658, 413 S.E.2d at 899, syl. pt. 2, in part. 2000Based upon the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Haslip, 499 U.S. 1 , 111 S.Ct. 1032 , 113 L.Ed.2d 1 (1991), establishing due process standards for punitive damage awards, 3 the Games decision establishes a process for awarding and reviewing a punitive damages issue: “Under our system for an award and review of punitive damages awards, there must be: (1) a reasonable constraint on jury discretion....” 186 W.Va. at 658, 413 S.E.2d at 899, syl. pt. 2, in part. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Shia v. Chvasta
green
2 sentences2000Radee points out that Rule 51 of the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[n]o party may assign as error the giving or the refusal to give an instruction unless the party objects thereto before the arguments to the jury are begun, stating distinctly, as to any given instruction, the matter to which the party objects and the grounds of the party’s objection[.]” Accord Syl. pt 5, Page v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., 198 W.Va. 378 , 480 S.E.2d 817 (1996); Syl. pt. 1, Shia v. Chvasta, 180 W.Va. 510 , 377 S.E.2d 644 (1988). 2000Radee points out that Rule 51 of the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[n]o party may assign as error the giving or the refusal to give an instruction unless the party objects thereto before the arguments to the jury are begun, stating distinctly, as to any given instruction, the matter to which the party objects and the grounds of the party’s objection[.]” Accord Syl. pt 5, Page v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., 198 W.Va. 378 , 480 S.E.2d 817 (1996); Syl. pt. 1, Shia v. Chvasta, 180 W.Va. 510 , 377 S.E.2d 644 (1988). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Page v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc.
green
2 sentences2000Radee points out that Rule 51 of the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[n]o party may assign as error the giving or the refusal to give an instruction unless the party objects thereto before the arguments to the jury are begun, stating distinctly, as to any given instruction, the matter to which the party objects and the grounds of the party’s objection[.]” Accord Syl. pt 5, Page v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., 198 W.Va. 378 , 480 S.E.2d 817 (1996); Syl. pt. 1, Shia v. Chvasta, 180 W.Va. 510 , 377 S.E.2d 644 (1988). 2000Radee points out that Rule 51 of the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[n]o party may assign as error the giving or the refusal to give an instruction unless the party objects thereto before the arguments to the jury are begun, stating distinctly, as to any given instruction, the matter to which the party objects and the grounds of the party’s objection[.]” Accord Syl. pt 5, Page v. Columbia Natural Resources, Inc., 198 W.Va. 378 , 480 S.E.2d 817 (1996); Syl. pt. 1, Shia v. Chvasta, 180 W.Va. 510 , 377 S.E.2d 644 (1988). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Kolstad v. American Dental Assn.
green
2 sentences1999We also note that the United States Supreme Court has recently addressed the standard for the award of punitive damages in a gender discrimination case, Kolstad v. American Dental Association, 527 U.S. 526 , 119 S.Ct. 2118 , 144 L.Ed.2d 494 (1999). 1999We also note that the United States Supreme Court has recently addressed the standard for the award of punitive damages in a gender discrimination case, Kolstad v. American Dental Association, 527 U.S. 526 , 119 S.Ct. 2118 , 144 L.Ed.2d 494 (1999). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Mace v. Charleston Area Medical Center Foundation, Inc.
green
2 sentences1997Given the trial court’s exemplary employment of the Games factors to this case as discussed above, we are satisfied that the trial court properly engaged in the review required and that the facts of this case with regard to the retaliation claim support upholding the fifteen to one ratio of punitive to compensatory damages without offending due process principles. 35 The final matter which we address is Sheetz’ request that this Court expand upon our recognition in Mace v. Charleston Area Medical Center Foundation, 188 W.Va. 57 , 422 S.E.2d 624 (1992) and Dzinglski v. Weirton Steel Corp., 191 1997Given the trial court’s exemplary employment of the Games factors to this case as discussed above, we are satisfied that the trial court properly engaged in the review required and that the facts of this case with regard to the retaliation claim support upholding the fifteen to one ratio of punitive to compensatory damages without offending due process principles. 35 The final matter which we address is Sheetz’ request that this Court expand upon our recognition in Mace v. Charleston Area Medical Center Foundation, 188 W.Va. 57 , 422 S.E.2d 624 (1992) and Dzinglski v. Weirton Steel Corp., 191 | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Dzinglski v. Weirton Steel Corp.
green
2 sentences1997Given the trial court’s exemplary employment of the Games factors to this case as discussed above, we are satisfied that the trial court properly engaged in the review required and that the facts of this case with regard to the retaliation claim support upholding the fifteen to one ratio of punitive to compensatory damages without offending due process principles. 35 The final matter which we address is Sheetz’ request that this Court expand upon our recognition in Mace v. Charleston Area Medical Center Foundation, 188 W.Va. 57 , 422 S.E.2d 624 (1992) and Dzinglski v. Weirton Steel Corp., 191 1997Given the trial court’s exemplary employment of the Games factors to this case as discussed above, we are satisfied that the trial court properly engaged in the review required and that the facts of this case with regard to the retaliation claim support upholding the fifteen to one ratio of punitive to compensatory damages without offending due process principles. 35 The final matter which we address is Sheetz’ request that this Court expand upon our recognition in Mace v. Charleston Area Medical Center Foundation, 188 W.Va. 57 , 422 S.E.2d 624 (1992) and Dzinglski v. Weirton Steel Corp., 191 | 1 | 1997–1997 |
MacE v. CHARLESTON AREA MED CTR. FOUND.
green
2 sentences1997Given the trial court’s exemplary employment of the Games factors to this case as discussed above, we are satisfied that the trial court properly engaged in the review required and that the facts of this case with regard to the retaliation claim support upholding the fifteen to one ratio of punitive to compensatory damages without offending due process principles. 35 The final matter which we address is Sheetz’ request that this Court expand upon our recognition in Mace v. Charleston Area Medical Center Foundation, 188 W.Va. 57 , 422 S.E.2d 624 (1992) and Dzinglski v. Weirton Steel Corp., 191 1997Given the trial court’s exemplary employment of the Games factors to this case as discussed above, we are satisfied that the trial court properly engaged in the review required and that the facts of this case with regard to the retaliation claim support upholding the fifteen to one ratio of punitive to compensatory damages without offending due process principles. 35 The final matter which we address is Sheetz’ request that this Court expand upon our recognition in Mace v. Charleston Area Medical Center Foundation, 188 W.Va. 57 , 422 S.E.2d 624 (1992) and Dzinglski v. Weirton Steel Corp., 191 | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Mayer v. Frobe
green
2 sentences1996We would inform the trial court that this analysis should be conducted exclusively within the boundaries of Syllabus Points 3 and 4 of Games, and Syllabus Point 15 of TXO. 12 We believe that it is appropriate at this time to remove from the lexicon of reviewing the amount of a punitive damage award the terms “really mean” and “really stupid,” as they were applied in TXO. 13 We should emphasize that our punitive damage jurisprudence includes a two-step paradigm: first, a determination of whether the conduct of an actor toward another person entitles that person to a punitive damage award, see M 1996We would inform the trial court that this analysis should be conducted exclusively within the boundaries of Syllabus Points 3 and 4 of Games, and Syllabus Point 15 of TXO. 12 We believe that it is appropriate at this time to remove from the lexicon of reviewing the amount of a punitive damage award the terms “really mean” and “really stupid,” as they were applied in TXO. 13 We should emphasize that our punitive damage jurisprudence includes a two-step paradigm: first, a determination of whether the conduct of an actor toward another person entitles that person to a punitive damage award, see M | 1 | 1996–1996 |
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.