course hearing in West Virginia

2017As this Court has repeatedly cautioned, “‘[a] litigant may not silently acquiesce to an alleged error, or actively contribute to such error, and then raise that error as a reason for reversal on appeal.’ Syllabus Point 1, Maples v. West Virginia Dep’t of Commerce, 197 W.Va. 318 , 475 S.E.2d 410 (1996).” Syl.

2017As this Court has repeatedly cautioned, “‘[a] litigant may not silently acquiesce to an alleged error, or actively contribute to such error, and then raise that error as a reason for reversal on appeal.’ Syllabus Point 1, Maples v. West Virginia Dep’t of Commerce, 197 W.Va. 318 , 475 S.E.2d 410 (1996).” Syl.

1999Instead, he expressed the opinion that it was unnecessary for the court to sanction or ratify the agreement relating to the custody of the child, and he expressed the opinion that, given the holding in Overfield v. Collins, id., it was questionable whether he had authority to grant the relief sought.

1997As we held in syllabus point two of State ex rel Cooper v. Caperton, 196 W.Va. 208 , 470 S.E.2d 162 (1996): “To preserve an issue for appellate review, a party must articulate it with such sufficient distinctiveness to alert á circuit court to the nature of the claimed defect.” See Id., 196 W.Va. at 216 , 470 S.E.2d at 170 . (“It must be emphasized that the contours for appeal are shaped at the circuit court level by setting forth with particularity and at the appropriate time the legal ground upon which the parties intend to rely.”) Though defendant now asserts that the court committed error

1997As we held in syllabus point two of State ex rel Cooper v. Caperton, 196 W.Va. 208 , 470 S.E.2d 162 (1996): “To preserve an issue for appellate review, a party must articulate it with such sufficient distinctiveness to alert á circuit court to the nature of the claimed defect.” See Id., 196 W.Va. at 216 , 470 S.E.2d at 170 . (“It must be emphasized that the contours for appeal are shaped at the circuit court level by setting forth with particularity and at the appropriate time the legal ground upon which the parties intend to rely.”) Though defendant now asserts that the court committed error

1986(Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 U.S. 263 , 104 S.Ct. 3049 , 82 L.Ed.2d 200 (1984) acknowledges the authority of state courts operating under state law to craft appropriate remedies for constitutional imperfections in state tax schemes).

1986(Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 U.S. 263 , 104 S.Ct. 3049 , 82 L.Ed.2d 200 (1984) acknowledges the authority of state courts operating under state law to craft appropriate remedies for constitutional imperfections in state tax schemes).

1982While there is some authority for the proposition that an employee’s skills can never be the subject of a restrictive covenant, even when acquired through a course of instruction in the employment, Club Aluminum Co. v. Young, 263 Mass. 223 , 160 N.E. 804 (1928), this is not the better rule.

1982While there is some authority for the proposition that an employee’s skills can never be the subject of a restrictive covenant, even when acquired through a course of instruction in the employment, Club Aluminum Co. v. Young, 263 Mass. 223 , 160 N.E. 804 (1928), this is not the better rule.

1949Va. 54, 64 , 39 S. E. 2d 177, 186 , involving the construction of a statute, this Court said: “* * * [it is a] well recognized and long established principal of interpretation of written instruments that the express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of another, expressio unius est exclusio alterius * * During the course of the hearing before the commissioner, the defendants sought by oral evidence to assert a modification of the contract, to the effect that plaintiffs should be charged with such cost or share of defendants’ general overhead, as the cost of the work done by plain *489