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 1997–2022 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Easterling v. American Optical Corp.green2 sentences2013Bell Atlantic-West Virginia, Inc. v. Ranson, 201 W.Va. 402 , 497 S.E.2d 755 (1997), this Court held, in pertinent part, that when a defendant files a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(2) of the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure, the circuit court may permit discovery to aid in its decision and that if “the court conducts a pretrial evidentiary hearing on the motion, . . . the party asserting jurisdiction must prove jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence.” In Easterling v. American Optical Corporation, 207 W.Va. 123, 127 , 529 S.E.2d 588, 592 (20 2013Bell Atlantic-West Virginia, Inc. v. Ranson, 201 W.Va. 402 , 497 S.E.2d 755 (1997), this Court held, in pertinent part, that when a defendant files a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(2) of the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure, the circuit court may permit discovery to aid in its decision and that if “the court conducts a pretrial evidentiary hearing on the motion, . . . the party asserting jurisdiction must prove jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence.” In Easterling v. American Optical Corporation, 207 W.Va. 123, 127 , 529 S.E.2d 588, 592 (20 | 2 | 2 |
State Ex Rel. Bell Atlantic-West Virginia, Inc. v. Ransongreen2 sentences2020If, however, the court conducts a pretrial evidentiary hearing on the motion, or if the personal jurisdiction issue is litigated at trial, the party asserting jurisdiction must prove jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence. 15 Bell Atlantic, 201 W. 2013Bell Atlantic-West Virginia, Inc. v. Ranson, 201 W.Va. 402 , 497 S.E.2d 755 (1997), this Court held, in pertinent part, that when a defendant files a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(2) of the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure, the circuit court may permit discovery to aid in its decision and that if “the court conducts a pretrial evidentiary hearing on the motion, . . . the party asserting jurisdiction must prove jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence.” In Easterling v. American Optical Corporation, 207 W.Va. 123, 127 , 529 S.E.2d 588, 592 (20 | 1 | 4 |
Ecocards, a Wyoming Corporation v. Tekstir, Inc., a Delaware Corporationgreen1 sentence2022P. 12(b)(2), the circuit court may rule on the motion upon the pleadings, affidavits and other documentary evidence or the court may permit discovery to aid in its decision[;]” it may also conduct “a pretrial evidentiary hearing on the motion[.]”); see also Ecocards v. Tekstir, Inc., 459 P.3d 1111, 1116 (Wyo. 2020) (“If there are disputed issues of fact regarding venue, the district court may, in its discretion, hold an evidentiary hearing to resolve the Rule 12(b)(3) motion.”). 20 | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Roy Karon and Peddler LLC v. Elliott Aviation, James Mitchell, Wynn Elliott, Elliott Aviation Aircraft Sales, Inc., and Elliott Jets
green
1 sentence2022The circuit 37 Karon v. Elliott Aviation, 937 N.W.2d 334 , 346 (Iowa 2020). 19 court may, in its discretion, hold a pretrial evidentiary hearing to resolve Petitioners’ motion to dismiss. 38 IV. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Griffith & Coe Advertising, Inc. v. Farmers & Merchants Bank
green
2 sentences2008Syl., Griffith & Coe Advertising v. Farmers & Merchants Bank and Trust, 215 W.Va. 428 , 599 S.E.2d 851 (2004); syl. pts. 1 and 2, Bowers, supra.; F.D. 2008Syl., Griffith & Coe Advertising v. Farmers & Merchants Bank and Trust, 215 W.Va. 428 , 599 S.E.2d 851 (2004); syl. pts. 1 and 2, Bowers, supra.; F.D. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Town of Fayetteville v. Law
green
2 sentences2004Easterling v. American Optical Corporation, 207 W.Va. 123, 127 , 529 S.E.2d 588, 592 (2000); syl. pt. 2, Bowers v. Wurzburg, 202 W.Va. 43 , 501 S.E.2d 479 (1998); syl. pt. 2, Town of Fayetteville v. Law, 201 W.Va. 205 , 495 S.E.2d 843 (1997). 2004Easterling v. American Optical Corporation, 207 W.Va. 123, 127 , 529 S.E.2d 588, 592 (2000); syl. pt. 2, Bowers v. Wurzburg, 202 W.Va. 43 , 501 S.E.2d 479 (1998); syl. pt. 2, Town of Fayetteville v. Law, 201 W.Va. 205 , 495 S.E.2d 843 (1997). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Bowers v. Wurzburg
green
2 sentences2004Easterling v. American Optical Corporation, 207 W.Va. 123, 127 , 529 S.E.2d 588, 592 (2000); syl. pt. 2, Bowers v. Wurzburg, 202 W.Va. 43 , 501 S.E.2d 479 (1998); syl. pt. 2, Town of Fayetteville v. Law, 201 W.Va. 205 , 495 S.E.2d 843 (1997). 2004Easterling v. American Optical Corporation, 207 W.Va. 123, 127 , 529 S.E.2d 588, 592 (2000); syl. pt. 2, Bowers v. Wurzburg, 202 W.Va. 43 , 501 S.E.2d 479 (1998); syl. pt. 2, Town of Fayetteville v. Law, 201 W.Va. 205 , 495 S.E.2d 843 (1997). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
David T. Combs Sarah E. Combs v. James O. Bakker Tammy Faye Bakker Richard Dortch
green
2 sentences1997Combs, 886 F.2d at 676 ; Market/Media Research v. Union-Tribune Pub. 1997Combs, 886 F.2d at 676 ; Market/Media Research v. Union-Tribune Pub. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
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.